U.  S.  DEPARTMENT  OF    AGRICULTURE, 

OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS— BULLETIN  NO. 
A.  C.  TRUE,  Director* 


A    DIGEST 


OF 


Ijlfi: 


E.VI 


BY 


C.    F.    LAlSrCfAV(  >.1JTIIY,  Ph.D. 
Office  of  Experiment  Stations. 


630.7061 
UW5 12 


WASHINGTON: 

GOVERNMENT    PRINTING    OFFICE. 


1  90  3 


L 


66] 


U.S.  DEPARTMENT  OF    AGRICULTURE 

OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS— BULLETIN  NO.  126. 


.  C.  TRUE,  Director. 


A    DIGEST 


OF 


nrm\T 

iM    hi 


X. 


BY 


C.    F.    LAlNTGrWC .)KTIIY,  F»h.  D. 

Office  of  Experiment  Stations. 


WASHINGTON: 

GOVERNMENT    PRINTING    OFFICE. 

1903. 


OFFICE  OF  EXPERIMENT  STATIONS. 

A.  C.  True,  Ph.  I).— Director. 

E.  W.  Allen,  Ph.  D. -^Assistant  Director  and  Editor  of  Experiment  Station  Record. 

W.  H.  Beal — Chief  of  Editorial  Division. 

C.  E.  Johnston— Chief  Clerk. 

editorial   departments. 

E.  W.  Allen,  Ph.  D.,  and  H.  W.  Lawson — Chemistry,  Dairy  Farming,  and  Dairying. 

AV.  H.  Beal — Agricultural  Physics  and  Engineering. 

Walter  H.  Evans,  Ph.  D. — Botany  and  Diseases  of  Plants. 

C.  F.  Langwortiiy,  Ph.  D. — Foods  and  Animal  Production. 

J.  I.  Schulte — Field  Crops. 

E.  V.  Wilcox,  Ph.  D. — Entomology  and  Veterinary  Science. 

C.  B.  Smith — Horticulture. 

D.  J.  Crosby— Agricultural  Institutions. 

2 


LETTER  OF  TRANSMITTAL 


U.  S.  Department  'of  Agriculture, 

Office  of  Experiment  Stations, 
Washington,  D.  C. ,  January  <29,  1903. 

Sir:  I  have  the  honor  to  transmit  herewith  a  bulletin  prepared  by 
C.  F.  Langworthy,  Ph.  D.,  of  the  Office  of  Experiment  Stations,  which 
summarizes  and  discusses  the  results  of  experiments  on  the  feeding 
and  care  of  horses,  and  especially  the  investigations  of  recent  years. 
The  attempt  has  been  made  to  include  all  the  work  which  has  been 
carried  on  at  the  experiment  stations  in  the  United  States  as  well  as 
some  of  the  more  important  foreign  investigations.  Statistics  were  also 
gathered  regarding  the  rations  fed  horses  used  by  express  companies, 
cab  companies,  fire  departments,  packing  houses,  breweries,  etc.,  in 
different  regions  of  the  United  States,  with  a  view  to  learning  the  nutri- 
ents supplied  to  horses  performing  different  amounts  of  work.  The 
data  have  been  compared  with  similar  values  for  horses  fed  at  a  num- 
ber of  the  experiment  stations  under  more  or  less  definitely  known 
conditions.  The  rations  fed  army  horses  in  this  and  other  countries, 
the  horses  of  French  and  other  cab  companies,  etc.,  have  also  been 
included  for  purposes  of  comparison. 

Thanks  are  due  to  Director  W.  A.  Henry  of  the  Wisconsin  Station, 
Director  H.  J.  Patterson  of  the  Maryland  Station,  and  Mr.  G.  M.  Rom- 
mel of  the  Bureau  of  Animal  Industry  of  this  Department,  for  valu- 
able suggestions,  and  to  Mr.  H.  A.  Pratt  of  the  Department  of  the 
Interior,  for  assistance  in  making  the  calculations  involved  in  preparing 
the  material. 

Believing  that  the  bulletin  will  prove  a  useful  summary  of  the  infor- 
mation at  present  available  regarding  the  feeding  of  horses,  I  recom- 
mend that  it  be  published  as  Bulletin  No.  125  of  this  Office. 

Respectfully,  A.  C.  True, 

Director. 

Hon.  James  Wilson, 

Secretary  of  Agriculture. 


CONTENTS. 


Page. 

Introduction 7 

Principles  of  nutrition 9 

Composition  of  feeding  stuffs 12 

Comparative  value  of  feeding  stuffs 15 

Cereal  grains 15 

Leguminous  seeds 20 

Oil  cakes  and  other  commercial  by-products 20 

Forage  crops,  fresh  and  cured 22 

Roots  and  tubers 27 

Molasses  and  other  by-products  of  sugar  making 28 

Fruits,  fresh  and  dried 31 

Injurious  feeding  stuffs T 32 

Method  of  feeding 33 

Cooked  and  raw  feed 34 

Dry  and  soaked  feed 34 

Ground  and  unground  feed 34 

Cut  and  uncut  coarse  fodder 35 

Cost  of  a  ration 36 

Fattening  horses  for  market 36 

Watering  horses 37 

Digestibility  of  feeding  stuffs 40 

Comparative  digestibility  by  horses  and  ruminants 44 

Rations  actually  fed  and  feeding  standards 46 

Method  of  calculating  rations 58 

Muscular  work  and  its  effect  on  food  requirements 59 

Measuring  muscular  work 59 

Muscular  work  in  its  relation  to  the  ration . 62 

Effect  of  muscular  work  on  digestibility 65 

Metabolism  experiments  and  the  deductions  drawn  from  them 66 

Measuring  the  respiratory  quotient  and  the  deductions  drawn  from  it 67 

Proportion  of  energy  of  food  expended  for  internal  and  external  muscular 

work 68 

Energy  required  to  chew  and  digest  food 69 

4 '  True  nutritive  value ' '  of  feeding  stuffs 69 

Fixing  rations  on  the  basis  of  internal  and  external  muscular  work 71 

Summary 73 

5 


RECENT  EXPERIMENTS  IN  HORSE  FEEDING. 


INTRODUCTION. 

The  scientific  study  of  different  problems  connected  with  the  feeding 
of  farm  animals  has  been  followed  for  something  over  half  a  century. 
Some  of  the  very  early  work  was  with  horses,  but  more  generally  it 
was  carried  on  with  other  domestic  animals.  Within  the  last  few  years 
this  phase  of  the  problem  has  received  much  more  attention,  and  feed- 
ing tests,  digestion  experiments,  and  more  complicated  investigations 
have  accumulated  in  considerable  numbers.  The  bulk  of  this  work 
has  been  carried  on  in  France  and  Germany;  a  creditable  amount, 
however,  has  been  done  in  this  countiy,  notabhr  by  the  agricultural 
experiment  stations,  and  the  results  of  these  experiments  and  obser- 
vations have  been  published  from  time  to  time,  and  are  veiy  useful. 
Mention  must  be  made  also  of  the  work  of  practical  feeders,  which  is 
of  great  value. 

In  the  present  bulletin  the  attempt  is  made  to  bring  together  some 
of  the  more  important  results  and  deductions  which  may  be  gathered 
from  the  American  and  foreign  experimental  work,  especiall}"  that  of 
recent  years.  It  is  not  the  purpose  to  provide  practical  feeders  with 
directions  for  feeding  according  to  a  particular  formula;  indeed  this 
is  not  necessary,  if  it  were  possible,  for  practical  feeders  understand 
the  needs  of  their  horses  and  how  to  meet  them.  The  object  is  rather 
to  summarize  matter  which  seems  interesting  and  valuable,  and  which 
in  many  cases  may  give  the  reason  for  something  of  which  the  wisdom 
has  long  been  recognized  in  practice. 

In  addition  to  the  bulletins,  reports,  and  other  works  cited  in  the 
following  pages,  a  large  number  of  scientific  and  popular  journals, 
treatises  on  horse  feeding,  and  similar  publications  have  been  consulted, 
as  well  as  reports  issued  by  American  and  foreign  experiment  stations. 

That  a  scientific  study  of  the  feeding  of  horses  may  not  be  without 
direct  practical  value  is  shown  by  the  work  of  Grandeau,  Leclerc,  Lava- 
lard,  and  others  for  the  Paris  Cab  and  'Bus  companies.  By  means  of 
experimental  studies  of  the  food  value  and  digestibility  of  different 
feeding  stuffs,  carried  on  under  definite  conditions,  it  was  possible  to 
so  modify  the  ration  fed  to  the  thousands  of  horses  belonging  to  one 
of  these  companies  that  an  annual  saving  of  1,000,000  francs  or  over 
was  effected,  while  at  the  same  time  the  health  and  strength  of  the 

7 


8 

horses  were  maintained  at  the  usual  standard.  This  was  accomplished 
in  the  instance  cited  by  demonstrating  the  value  of  Indian  corn,  against 
which  there  was  a  prejudice  in  France,  and  substituting  it  in  part  for 
oats. 

The  returns  from  scientific  studies  arc  not  always  so  immediate,  but 
the  results  are  usual ly  of  use  when  the  experiments  have  been  well 
planned  and  carried  out. 

The  problem  of  horse  feeding  is  one  which  each  feeder  solves  more 
or  less  for  himself,  the  opinion  regarding  what  is  and  wThat  is  not  sat- 
isfactory feed  varying  more  or  less  with  the  time  and  place.  Opinions 
may  differ  as  to  the  value  of  this  food  or  that,  but  it  is  evident  that 
the  actual  food  requirements  of  a  horse  performing  a  given  amount  of 
work  can  not  vary  as  a  result  of  a  change  of  opinion  on  the  feeder's 
part.  With  horses,  as  with  all  animals,  including  man,  the  real  prob- 
lem is  to  suppl}T  sufficient  nutritive  material  for  building  and  repairing 
the  body  and  furnishing  it  with  the  energy-  necessary  for  performing 
work,  whether  it  be  that  which  goes  on  inside  the  body  (the  beating 
of  the  heart,  respiratory  movements,  etc.),  or  the  work  which  is  per- 
formed outside  the  body  (hauling  a  load,  etc.).  The  body  temperature 
must  also  be  maintained  at  the  expense  of  the  fuel  ingredients,  but 
whether  material  is  burned  in  the  bod}7  primarily  for  this  purpose,  or 
whether  the  necessary  heat  is  a  resultant  of  the  internal  muscular 
work,  is  not  known  with  certainty. 

The  problem  of  successfully  feeding  horses  differs  somewhat  from 
that  encountered  in  feeding  most  domestic  animals.  Cattle,  sheep, 
and  pigs  are  fed  to  induce  gains  in  weight,  i.  e. ,  to  fatten  them,  or  in 
the  case  of  milch  cows  to  produce  gains  in  the  form  of  a  bod}T  secre- 
tion (milk)  rather  than  as  fat  in  the  body.  In  a  similar  wa}T  sheep 
are  fed  for  the  production  of  wool,  and  poultry  for  the  production  of 
eggs.  Sometimes  cattle  are  also  fed  as  beasts  of  burden.  Horses  are 
fed  almost  universally  as  beasts  of  burden,  whether  the  work  consists 
in  carrying  a  rider  or  drawing  a  load. 

Mares  with  foal  require  food  for  the  development  of  their  young, 
and  after  birth  the  colt  needs  it  for  the  growth  and  development  of 
the  body  as  well  as  for  maintenance.  Such  demands  for  nutritive 
material  are  common  to  all  classes  of  animals.  Sometimes  horses  are 
fed  to  increase  their  weight;  that  is,  to  improve  their  condition.  For 
instance,  animals  are  often  fattened  by  horse  dealers  before  they  are 
sold.  However,  generally  speaking,  the  problem  in  horse  feeding  is 
to  supply  sufficient  nutritive  material  for  the  production  of  the  work 
required  and  at  the  same  time  to  maintain  the  body  weight.  The 
almost  universal  experience  of  practical  horse  feeders,  and  the  results 
of  many  carefully  planned  experiments,  agree  that  there  is  no  surer 
test  of  the  fitness  of  any  given  ration  than  that  it  enables  the  horse 
fed  to  maintain  a  constant   weight.     If   the  animal  loses  weight  it 


9 

is  evident  that  the  ration  is  insufficient,  while  if  gains  in  weight  arc 
made  and  the  animal  becomes  fat  it  is  evident  that  more  U>^(\  is  given 
than  is  necessary.  Provided  the  horse  is  in  good  condition,  it  is  seldom 
desirable  to  induce  any  considerable  gain  in  weight.  Reference  is  not 
made  to  the  small  daily  fluctuations  in  weight,  hut  to  gains  or  losses 
which  extend,  over  a  considerable  period.  The  most  satisfactory  ration 
must  necessarily  be  made  up  of  materials  which  are  wholesome  and 
arc  relished  by  the  horse.  It  should  also  be  reasonable  in  cost.  It 
must  be  abundant  enough  to  meet  all  body  requirements,  but  not  so 
abundnnt  that  the  horse  lavs  on  an  undesirable  amount  of  flesh. 

PRINCIPLES  OF  NUTRITION. 

The  foundation  principles  of  nutrition  are  the  same  in  the  case  of  all 
animals,  including  man.  A  brief  discussion  of  the  properties  of  food 
and  the  general  laws  of  nutrition  follows. 

The  study  of  foods  and  feeding  stuffs  has  shown  that  although  the}T 
differ  so  much  in  texture  and  appearance  they  are  in  reality  made  up 
of  a  small  number  of  chemical  constituents,  namely,  protein,  fat,  car- 
bohydrates, and  ash,  together  with  a  larger  or  smaller  amount  of 
water.  The  latter  can  be  often  seen,  as  in  the  juice  of  fresh  plants. 
In  dry  hay  no  water  or  juice  is  visible.  A  small  amount  is,  however, 
contained  in  minute  particles  in  the  plant  tissues. 

Protein  is  a  name  given  to  the  total  group  of  nitrogenous  materials 
present.  The  group  is  made  up  mainly  of  the  true  proteids  and 
albumens,  such  as  the  gluten  of  wheat,  and  of  nitrogenous  materials 
such  as  amids,  which  are  believed  to  have  a  lower  feeding  value  than 
the  albumens. 

The  group  "  fat "  includes  the  true  vegetable  fats  and  oils,  like  the  oil 
in  cotton  seed  or  corn,  as  well  as  vegetable  wax,  some  chlorophyl  (the 
green  coloring  matter  in  leaves,  etc.),  and  other  coloring  matters;  in 
brief,  all  the  materials  which  are  extracted  by  ether  in  the  usual  labo- 
ratory method  of  estimating  fat.  The  name  u ether  extract"  is  often 
and  very  properly  applied  to  this  group.  Chemically  considered,  the 
true  fats  are  glycerids  of  the  fatty  acids,  chiefly  oleic,  stearic,  and 
palmitic. 

The  group  ' '  carbolrydrates  "  includes  starches,  sugars,  crude  fiber, 
cellulose,  pentosans,  and  other  bodies  of  a  similar  chemical  struc- 
ture. This  group  is  usually  subdivided,  according  to  the  analytical 
methods  followed  in  estimating  it,  into  "  nitrogen-free  extract"  and 
4 'crude  fiber;"  the  former  subdivision  including  principally  sugar, 
starches,  and  most  of  the  pentosans,  and  the  latter  cellulose,  lignin, 
and  other  woody  substances  which  very  largely  make  up  the  rigid  struc- 
ture of  plants. 

The  proteids  contain  nitrogen  in  addition  to  carbon,  oxygen,  hydro- 
gen, and  a  little  phosphorus  and  sulphur.     The  fats  consist  of  carbon, 


10 

oxygen,  and  hydrogen,  as  do  also  carbohydrates.  In  the  carbohy- 
drates, however,  the  oxygen  and  hydrogen  are  always  present  in 
the  proportions  in  which  they  occur  in  water,  namely,  two  atoms  of 
hydrogen  to  one  of  oxygen. 

The  group  "mineral  matter"  includes  the  inorganic  bodies  present 
in  the  form  of  salts  in  the  juices  and  tissue  of  the  different  feeding 
stuffs,  the  principal  chemical  elements  found  being  sodium,  potassium. 
calcium,  chlorin,  fluorin,  phosphorus,  and  sulphur.  The  term  "  ash  " 
is  often  and  very  properly  used  for  this  group,  since  the  mineral 
matter  represents  the  incombustible  portion  which  remains  when  any 
given  feeding  stuff  is  burned. 

As  noted  above,  the  functions  of  food  are  (1)  to  supply  material  to 
build  and  repair  the  body,  and  (2)  to  yield  energy.  The  chemical 
composition  of  a  feeding  stuff  serves  as  a  basis  for  judging  of  its  value 
for  building  and  repairing  body  tissue.  Its  value  as  a  source  of  energy 
must,  however,  be  learned  in  another  way.  The  most  usual  way  of 
measuring  energy  is  in  terms  of  heat,  the  calorie  being  taken  as  a  unit. 
This  is  the  amount  of  heat  which  would  raise  the  temperature  of  1 
kilogram  of  water  1°  C,  or  1  pound  of  water  4U  F.  Instead  of  this  the 
unit  of  mechanical  energy,  the  foot- ton  (the  force  which  would  lift  1 
ton  1  foot)  may  be  used,  but  it  is  not  as  convenient.  One  calorie  cor- 
responds very  nearly  to  1.54  foot-tons.  The  heat  of  combustion  of 
foods  and  feeding  stuffs  is  ordinarily  determined  with  the  bomb  calo- 
rimeter or  other  suitable  devices.  The  fuel  value  of  any  food  is  equal 
to  its  heat  of  combustion  less  the  energy  of  the  excretory  products 
derived  from  it  and  may  be  learned  by  taking  into  account  the  chem- 
ical composition  of  the  food  or  feeding  stuff,  the  proportions  of  the 
nutrients  actually-  digested  and  oxidized  in  the  bod}T,  and  the  propor- 
tion of  the  whole  latent  energy  of  each  which  becomes  active  and  use- 
ful to  the  body  for  warmth  and  work.  However,  the  fuel  value  ma}T 
be  and  often  is  calculated  from  the  composition  of  the  food  material 
supplied,  since  it  has  been  found  that  1  gram  of  protein  furnishes  4.1 
calories,  1  gram  fat  9.3  calories,  and  1  gram  carbohydrates  4.1  calo- 
ries, or  1  pound  protein  1,860  calories,  1  pound  fat  4,220  calories,  and 
1  pound  carbohydrates  1,860  calories." 

The  relation  between  the  quantities  of  nitrogenous  and  nitrogen-free 
nutrients  in  the  ration  is  called  the  nutritive  or  nutrient  ratio.  In  cal- 
culating this  ratio  1  pound  of  fat  is  taken  as  equivalent  to  2.25  pounds 
of   carbohydrates — this  being  approximately  the  ratio  of  their  fuel 

a  These  values,  which  have  been  often  used  in  the  past,  are  known  to  be  unsatis- 
factory, but  are  retained  because  better  and  more  generally  accepted  data,  obtained 
in  experiments  with  animals,  are  not  available. 

In  discussions  relating  to  human  food  later  and  more  accurate  values  have  been 
proposed,  namely,  1,820  calories  per  pound  for  protein  and  carbohydrates  and  4,040 
calories  per  pound  for  fats. 


11 

values — so  that  the  nutritive  ratio  is  actually  that  of  the  protein  to  the 
carbohydrates  plus  2.25  times  the  fat.„ 

The  body  is  necessarily  made  up  of  the  same  chemical  elements  as 
occur  in  food.  Nitrogen  is  the  characteristic  element  of  body  tissue  and 
fluids.  Carbon,  oxygen,  and  hydrogen  are  also  present,  as  well  as  the 
elements  making  up  the  various  mineral  matters  of  the  body.  Protein 
is  the  only  nutrient  which  contains  nitrogen,  therefore  this  nutrient  is 
essential  for  building  and  repairing  body  tissues.  The  carbon,  oxy- 
gen, and  hydrogen  may  be  supplied  theoretically  by  protein,  fat,  or 
carbohydrates;  but  a  well-balanced  diet  or  ration  contains  all  in  proper 
proportion.  Protein,  fat,  and  carbohydrates  may  be  burned  with  the 
formation  of  carbon  dioxid  and  water,  and  therefore  all  may  serve  as 
sources  of  energy. 

The  mineral  matter  in  food  is  required  for  a  number  of  different 
purposes,  a  considerable  amount  being  needed  for  the  formation  of 
the  skeleton.  Some  is  also  present  in  the  organs  and  tissues.  It  can 
not,  however,  be  regarded  as  a  source  of  energy,  according  to  com- 
monly accepted  theories,  since  it  can  not  be  burned  with  the  formation 
of  carbon  dioxid  and  water.  The  water  present  in  food  is  not  a 
nutrient  in  the  sense  that  it  serves  for  building  tissue  or  yielding 
energy,  but  it  is  essential,  serving  to  carry  the  food  in  the  digestive 
processes,  to  dilute  the  blood,  and  for  many  other  physiological  pur- 
poses. The  oxygen  of  the  air  is  required  by  all  living  animals  for  the 
combustion,  or  oxidation,  of  the  fuel  constituents  of  food. 

When  foods  are  burned  in  the  body,  i.  e.,  oxidized,  they  give  up  the 
latent  energy  present  in  them.  In  determining  the  fuel  value  of  pro- 
tein, due  allowance  is  made  for  the  fact  that  combustion  is  not  as  com- 
plete in  the  body  as  in  a  furnace.  In  the  latter,  practically  all  organic 
materials  are  burned  to  carbon  dioxid,  water,  and  nitrogen;  in  the 
body,  to  carbon  dioxid,  water,  and  some  cleavage  product  containing 
nitrogen,  such  as  urea,  uric  acid,  hippuric  acid,  and  similar  bodies 
which  require  further  combustion  before  the  free  nitrogen  is  liberated. 
Combustion  in  a  furnace  and  combustion  in  the  bod}T  do  not  appear  to 
be  at  all  similar,  but,  generally  speaking,  they  are  the  same  from  a 
chemical  standpoint.  The  former  takes  place  rapidly  with  the  evolu- 
tion of  heat,  and  usually  of  light;  the  latter,  more  slowl}T  and  incon- 
spicuous^. If  food  is  likened  to  fuel  and  the  body  to  a  furnace,  the 
respiratory  products  given  off  from  the  lungs  correspond  to  the  com- 
bustion products  which  pass  out  through  the  flue.  Ashes,  in  so  far  as 
they  consist  of  material  which  will  not  burn  (sand,  bits  of  rock,  etc.), 
and  bits  of  coal  which  do  not  burn  because  they  fall  through  the  grate, 
or  for  some  similar  reason  escape  combustion,  represent  the  feces  (the 
indigestible  and  accidentally  undigested  material  derived  from  the  food). 
The  bits  of  coal  found  in  the  ashes  which  are  partially  burned,  but 
still  contain  some  material  valuable  as  fuel,  correspond  to  the  urea 


12 

and  other  incompletely  oxidized  nitrogenous  bodies  excreted  in  the 
urine.  There  is  this  difference,  however,  the  furnace  would  have 
completed  the  combustion  of  the  partly  burned  bits  of  coal  if  the}' had 
not  been  shaken  out  with  the  ashes,  while  the  body  can  not  burn  the 
urea  more  completely.  The  body  differs  from  a  machine  in  a  number 
of  important  ways;  for  instance,  it  is  itself  built  up  of  the  same  mate- 
rials which  it  utilizes  as  fuel,  and  further,  if  an  excess  of  fuel,  i.  e., 
food,  is  supplied,  it  may  be  stored  as  a  reserve  material  for  future  use, 
generally  in  the  form  of  fat  or  glycogen. 

The  amount  of  work  performed  by  a  horse,  for  convenience  in  meas- 
urement, may  be  resolved  into  several  factors,  as  follows:  (1)  The 
energy  expended  in  chewing,  swallowing,  and  digesting  food,  keeping 
up  the  beating  of  the  heart,  circulation  of  the  blood,  respiratory  move- 
ments, and  other  vital  processes  ;a  (2)  the  energy  which  is  expended 
in  moving  the  body,  walking,  trotting,  etc.,  which  is  usually  spoken  of 
as  energy  required  for  forward  progression;  and  (3)  the  energy  which 
is  expended  in  carrying  a  rider,  as  in  the  case  of  a  saddle  horse,  or 
drawing  a  load,  as  in  the  case  of  a  draft  animal  or  carriage  horse. 

The  character  of  the  road,  whether  level  or  up  or  down  hill,  is  an 
important  factor  in  determining  the  amount  of  work.  It  is  evident 
that  more  energy  is  required  to  lift  the  body  at  each  step  and  move  it 
forward  when  climbing  an  incline  than  when  walking  on  a  level.  In 
the  same  way,  when  a  load  is  drawn  uphill  it  must  be  raised  as  well 
as  drawn  forward. 

Work  may  be  measured  as  foot-pounds  or  foot-tons,  or  by  any  other 
convenient  unit.  A  foot-pound  is  the  amount  of  energy  expended  in 
raising  1  pound  1  foot;  a  foot- ton,  that  expended  in  raising  1  ton  1 
foot;  a  commonly  used  unit  of  force  is  the  uton  power,"  equivalent 
to  550  foot-pounds  per  second.  Work  may  also  be  measured  in  terms 
of  heat,  i.  e.,  calories.  This  is  especially  convenient  in  discussing 
problems  of  nutrition,  since  the  heat  of  combustion  is  one  of  the  factors 
usually  determined  or  calculated  when  foods  are  analyzed;  and  further- 
more, the  feeding  standards  which  have  been  proposed  for  horses  and 
other  farm  animals  show  the  requirements  per  day  in  terms  of  nutri- 
ents and  energy.  One  calorie  corresponds,  as  stated  above,  very 
nearly  to  1.54  foot-tons. 

COMPOSITION  OF  FEEDING  STUFFS. 

The  feeding  stuffs  of  most  importance  for  horses  are  cereal  grains, 
such  as  oats  and  corn,  either  ground  or  unground;  leguminous  seeds, 
as  beans  and  peas;  cakes,  and  other  commercial  bj^-products,  as  oil- 
's The  heat  of  the  body  is  closely  connected  with  this  kind  of  work,  and  may  be 
derived  either  from  the  combustion  of  material  directly  for  that  purpose,  or  may  be 
the  result  of  the  energy  liberated  when  internal  muscular  work  is  performed,  or 
may  be  due  to  both  causes  acting  together. 


18 

cake, gluten  food,  and  so  on;  fodder  crops,  green  or  cured;  and  differ- 
ent roots,  tubers,  and  green  vegetables.  In  quite  recent  times  cane 
molasses,  boot  molasses,  and  other  beet-sugar  by-products,  have 
assumed  more  or  less  importance  in  this  connection.  The  composition 
of  a  number  of  those  different  feeding  stuffs  may  be  Been  by  reference 
to  the  table  below,  which  shows  the  average  composition  as  determined 
by  analysis,  and  when  possible  tho  digestible  nutrients  furnished  for 
horses  by  each  100  pounds  of  the  feeding  stuffs,  the  latter  data  having 
been  calculated,  as  explained  elsewhere  (p.  4o).  by  the  aid  of  figures 
obtained  in  digestion  experiments  with  horses.  In  a  number  of  cases 
such  calculations  have  not  been  made,  for  the  reason  that  experiments 
showing  tho  digestibility  of  feeding  stuffs  had  not  been  found,  nor  were 
results  of  experiments  made  with  similar  feeding  stuffs  available.  The 
comparatively  large  number  of  feeding  stuff's  of  which  the  digesti- 
bility has  not  been  determined  indicates  one  of  the  lines  of  work  which 
might  be  profitably  followed. 


Table  1 .  —  Average  composition  of  a  number  of  feeding  stuffs. 


Digestible  materials  in 
100  pounds. 


Kind  of  food 
material. 


GREEN   FODDER. 

Corn  fodder 

Corn  leaves  and  husks 

Cornstalks  stripped  . . 

Kafir  corn 

Rye  fodder 

Oat  fodder 

Wheat  fodder 

Redtop  in  bloom 

Tall     oat    grass     in 
bloom 

Orchard     grass      in 
bloom 

Meadow   fescue    in 
bloom 

Italian  rye  grass  com- 
ing into  bloom 

Timothy  at  different 
stages 

Kentucky  blue  grass 
at  different  stages  . . 

Hungarian  grass 

Red  clover  at  differ- 
ent stages 

Alsike    clover    in 
bloom  a 

Crimson  clover" 

Alfalfa    at   different 
stages 

Cowpea 

Soy  bean 

SILAGE. 


Corn  silage 

Sorghum  silage 

Red-clover  silage 

Soy-bean  silage 

Cowpea-vine  silage. . . 


Percentage  composition. 


Water. 


Per  ct. 
79.3 
66.2 
76.1 
73.0 
76.6 
62.2 
77.3 
65.  3 

69.5 

73.0 

69.9 

73.2 

61.6 

65. 1 
71.1 


74.8 
80.9 

71.8 
83.6 
75.1 


74.4 
76.1 
72.0 
74.  2 
79.3 


Pro- 
tein. 


Per  ct. 
1.8 
2.1 
.5 
2.3 
2.6 
3.4 
2.3 
2.8 

2.4 

2.6 

2.  1 

3.1 

3.1 

4.1 
3.1 

4.4 

3.9 


4.8 
2.4 
4.0 


Fat. 


4.2 
4.1 


Perct. 

0.5 

1.1 

.5 


1.4 

.7 


1.3 
1.2 
1.3 


1.0 

.4 

1.0 


1.1 
.3 
1.2 
2.2 
1.5 


Nitro- 
gen- 
free 
ex- 
tract. 


Per  ct. 
12.2 
19.0 
14.9 
15.1 
6.8 
19.3 
12.0 
17.7 

15.8 

13.3 

11.3 

13.1 

20.2 

17.6 
14.2 

13.5 

11.0 
8.4 

12.3 

7.1 

10.6 


15.  0 
15.3 
11.6 
7.0 
7.6 


Crude 
fiber. 


Per  ct. 

5.0 

8.7 

7.3 

6.9 

11.6 

11.2 

5.9 

11.0 

9.4 

8.2 

10.8 
6.8 

11.8 

9.1 

9.2 


7.4 
5.2 

7.4 
4.8 
6.7 


5.8 
6.4 
8.4 
9.7 
6.0 


Ash. 


Per  ct. 
1.2 
2.9 
.7 
2.0 
1.8 
2.5 
1.8 
2.3 

2.0 

2.0 

1.8 

2.5 

2.1 

2.8 
1.7 


2.0 

].: 

2.7 
1.7 
2.6 


1.5 
1.1 
2.6 
2.8 
2.9 


Pro- 
tein. 


Fat. 


Lbs. 


Lbs. 


3.44 


3.05 
2.  12 


3.75 


Nitro- 


fiber-    nulri 
ents. 


ex- 
tract 


Lbs. 


10.94 


8.91 
6.80 


9.96 


En- 
ergy 
in  100 
lbs.  di- 


Lbs. 


Calo- 
rics. 


3.79 


3.46 
2.  I:'- 


3.46 


33,796 

28, 681 
21,669 

31,  936 


a  Digestibility  calculated  from  values  obtained  with  green  alfalfa. 


14 


Table  1. — Average  composition  of  a  number  of  feeding  stuffs — Continued. 


Kind  of  food 

material. 


HAY  AND  DRY  COABSE 
FODDER. 

Corn    fodder,    field 

cured 

Comleaves,  field  cured 
Corn  husks,  field  cured 
Cornstalks,  field  cured 
Corn  stover,  fieldcured 
Kafir-corn  stover,  field 

cured 

Barley  hay 

Oat  hay 

Wheat  hay 

RedtopcutatdiilVivnt 

stagesa 

Red  top  cut  in  blooma. 

Orchard  grass« 

Timothy 

Kentucky  blue  grass  a . 

Hungarian  grass" 

Meadow  fescue  a 

Italian  rye  grassa 

Mixed  grasseso 

Rowen  (mixed)a 

Mixed    grasses    and 

clovers  «.. 

Swamp  hay  a 

iSalt-marsh  hay 

Red  clover., 

Red  clover  in  bloom  b. 

Alsike  clover  b 

White  clover  b 

Crimson  clover  & 

Alfalfa 

Cowpea 

Soy  bean 

Flat  pea 

Soy-bean  straw 

Wheat  straw 

Rye  straw  c 

Oat  straw  c 

Buckwheat  straw 

ROOTS  AND  TUBERS. 


Potatoes . 
Carrots  . . 


GRAINS   AND  OTHER 
SEEDS. 


Corn,  dent 

Corn,  flint 

Corn,  all  varieties... 

Kafir  corn 

Chicken  corn 

Barley 

Oats 

Rye 

Wheat,  all  varieties  . 
Cotton  seed,   whole, 

with  hulls 

Cowpea 


MILL  PRODUCTS. 


Corn  meal 

Oats,  ground 

Corn  and  cob  meal . . . 
Barley  meal 


Percentage  composition. 


Water 


Per  ct. 

42.2 
30.0 
50.9 
68.4 
40.5 

19.2 
10.6 
16.0 

8.8 

8.9 

8.7 

9.9 

13.2 

21.2 

7.7 

20.0 

8.5 

15.3 

16.6 

12.9 

11.6 

10.4 

15.3 

20.8 

9.7 

9.7 

9.6 

8.4 

10.7 

11.3 

8.4 

10.1 

9.6 

7.1 

9.2 


78.9 

88.6 


10.6 
11.3 
10.9 
12.5 
14.8 
10.9 
11.0 
11.6 
10.5 


15.0 
11.7 
15.1 
11.9 


Pro- 
tein. 


Per  ct. 

"4.5 
6.0 

2.5 
1.9 
3.8 

4.8 
9.3 
7.4 
6.0 

7.9 
8.0 
8.1 
5.9 
7.8 
7.5 
7.0 
7.5 
7.4 
11.6 

10.1 

7.2 

5.5 

12.3 

12.4 

12.8 

15.7 

15.2 

14.3 

16.6 

15.4 

22.9 

4.6 

3.4 

3.0 

4.0 

5.2 


2.1 
1.1 


10.3 
10.5 
10.5 
10.9 
10.6 
12.4 
11.8 
10.6 
11.9 

19.6 
23.5 


9.2 
11.0 

8.5 
10.5 


Fat. 


Per  ct, 


1.1 

1.6 
2.5 
2.7 
1.8 

1.9 
2.1 
2.6 
2.5 
3.9 
2.1 
2.7 
1.7 
2.5 
3.1 

2.6 
2.0 
2.4 
3.3 
4.5 
2.9 
2.9 
2.8 
2.2 
2.9 
5.2 
3.2 
1.7 
1.3 
1.2 
2.3 
1.3 


5.0 
5.0 
5.4 
2.9 
2.6 
1.8 
5.0 
1.7 
2.1 

20.1 

1.7 


3.9 
3.5 
2.2 


Nitro- 
gen- 
free 
ex- 
tract. 


Per  ct. 

34.7 
35.7 
28.  '■>> 
17.0 
31.5 

39.6 
48.7 
40.6 
55.3 

47.5 
46.4 
41.0 
45.0 
37.8 
49.0 
38.4 
44.9 
42.1 
39.4 

41.3 
45.9 
44.0 
38.1 
33.8 
40.7 
39.3 
36.6 
42.7 
42.2 
38.6 
31.4 
37.4 
43.4 
46.6 
42.4 
35.1 


17.3 
7.6 


70.4 
70.1 
69.6 
70.5 
58.8 
69.8 
59.7 
72.5 
71.9 

28.3 
55.7 


68.9 
52.3 
64.8 
66.3 


Crude 
liber. 


Per  ct. 

14.3 
21.4 
15.8 
11.0 
19.7 

26.8 
23.6 
27.2 
22.5 

28.6 
29.9 
32.4 
29.0 
23.0 
27.7 
25.0 
30.5 
27.2 
22.5 

27.6 
26.6 
30.0 
24.8 
21.9 
25.6 
24.1 
27.2 
25.0 
20.1 
22.3 
26.2 
40.4 
38.1 
38.9 
37.0 
43.0 


.6 

1.3 


2.2 
1.7 
2.1 
1.9 
8.7 
2.7 
9.5 
1.7 
1.8 

18.9 

3.8 


1.9 

18.0 

6.6 

6.5 


Ash. 


Per  ct. 

2.7 
5.5 
1.8 
1.2 
3.4 

8.0 
5.3 
6.1 
5.6 

5.2 
4.9 
6.0 
4.4 
6.3 
6.0 
6.9 
6.9 
5.5 
6.8 

5.5 
6.7 
7.7 
6.2 
6.6 
8.3 
8.3 
8.6 
7.4 
7.5 
7.2 
7.9 
5.8 
4.2 
3.2 
5.1 
5.5 


1.0 
1.0 


1.5 
1.4 
1.5 
1.3 
4.5 
2.4 
3.0 
1.9 
1.8 

4.0 
3.4 


Digestible  materials  in 
100  pounds. 


1.4 
3.1 
1.5 

2.6 


Pro- 
tein. 


Lbs. 


4.51 
4.57 
4.62 
1.25 
4.45 
4.28 
4.00 
4.28 
4.23 
6.62 

5.77 
4.11 


6.85 
6.91 
7.13 
8.74 
8.47 
10.67 


1.11 


1.85 
1.09 


5.95 
6.07 
6.07 


9.39 
8.51 


6.99 
9.06 


Fat. 


Lbs. 


0.39 
.43 

.51 
1.18 
.81 
.43 
.56 
.35 
.52 
.64 

.54 
.41 


.95 
1.29 
.83 
.83 
.80 
.42 


.85 
.79 

1.51 


2.39 
2.39 

2.58 


3.60 
.72 


2.55 
3.12 


Nitro- 
gen- 
free 
ex- 
tract. 


Lbs. 


Crude 
fiber. 


Lbs. 


26.  93 
26.31 
23.  25 
21 .  29 
21.43 

27.  78 
21.77 
25. 51 
23.87 
22. 34 

23.  42 
26.02 


11.35 
11.87 
12.86 
12.35 

9.13 
11.00 
10.28 
12. 11 
10.80 

8.93 

10.96 
10.56 


24. 19 
21.46 
25.  84 
24.96 
23.  24 
29.98 


12.20 
13.10 
11.91 


17.  20 
7.13 


62.  09 
61.83 
61.39 


9.27 
8.19 
9.57 
9.01 
10.17 
9.75 


6.74 
6.89 
6.55 


.  05 


45.25   2.82  122,062 
63.29   1.70  139,747 


64.70 
45.  03 


.38 
2.59 


a  Digestibility  calculated  from  values  obtained  with  meadow  hay. 
b  Digestibility  calculated  from  values  obtained  with  red  clover  hay. 
c  Digestibility  calculated  from  values  obtained  with  wheat  straw. 


If) 


Table  I.     Averag*  composition  of  a  number  of feeding  stuffs    Continued. 


Percentage  composition. 

Digestible  materials  i" 
hm)  pounds. 

En- 

in  KM) 

lbs.  di- 
gesti- 
ble 

nutri- 
ents 

Kind  of  food 
material. 

Water. 

Pro- 
tein. 

Kal. 

Niln. 
gen- 

Eree 
ea 

tract. 

Crude 

fiber. 

Ash. 

Pro- 
tein. 

Fat. 

Nitro- 
gen- 
tract. 

Crude 

Bber. 

Mill.  PRODUCTS — con. 

Perct. 

13.1 
10.5 

11.9 

10.7 

11.1 

8.7 

8.6 

7.s 

7.7 
12.2 
75.7 

8.0 
11.8 
11.9 
12.1 
11.8 
11.6 

8.2 
11.1 

9.2 

9.9 
25.7 
25.1 

Perct. 
6.7 
20.2 

'.<.  6 

2.  I 

9.8 

9.8 

30.0 

23.4 

16.0 

12.3 

5.4 

24.1 

14.7 

15.4 

15.6 

14.9 

12.5 

42.3 

4.2 

32.  9 

35.9 
"7.3 
a  2.  1 

Perct. 

II.  s 
1.2 

1.  1 
.5 

a.  3 

6.2 
8.8 
8.  8 
7.1 
2.8 
1.6 
6.7 
2.8 
4.0 
4.0 
4.5 
3.0 
13.1 
2.2 

7.9 

3.0 

::::::: 

Perct. 

7s.:; 
51.1 

71 

0.4 

11.  t 

9 

Perct. 

0.7 

2.6 

2.2 
14 

Los. 

Los. 

Lbs. 

Calo- 
rit  f. 

Ground  corn  and  oats 
(equal  parts) 

u  kSTK   l'KoDL'CTS. 

51.9       SOI 

id.:. 
62;  6 
49.2 
53.2 
59.4 
61.8 
12.5 
14.8 

3. 8         '>-  5 

11.2 

2.6 
6.2 
6.1 
7.3 
3.  8 
13.0 

1.5 

.8 
1.1 
3.7 
3.6 
1.0 
3.4 
3.5 
5.8 
3.3 
4.6 
2.9 
7.2 
2.8 

Oat  feed 

Barley  screenings  — 
Brewere'  grains,  wet.. 
Brewers'  grains,  dried. 

63.9  ,      3.3 
53. 9         90 

Wheat  middlings 

60.4 
56.8 
65.1 
23.6 
33.4 

4.6 
7.4 
4.9 
5.6 

46.  3 

Wheat  screenings 

Linseed     meal,     old 

35. 4         S.  9         5.  7 
86.8         8.8         5.6 

Linseed    meal,    new 

Beet-sugar  molasses  .. 
Cane-sugar  molasses.. 

ft  58.  2 
6  69. 3 





8.8 
3.2 

7.3    

3.2    

58.2 
69.3 



259,  182 

29S, 398 

(i  Largely  nonalbuminoid  nitrogenous  materials. 
•  6  Very  largely  sugars. 

COMPARATIVE  VALUE  OF  FEEDING  STUFFS. 

CEREAL  GRAINS. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  cereal  grains  resemble  each  other  quite 
closely  in  composition,  being  characterized  by  fairl}T  low  water  con- 
tent and  a  considerable  amount  of  protein  and  nitrogen-free  extract. 
Some  crude  liber,  derived  from  the  outer  or  bran  layei'  of  the  corn,  is 
also  present.  The  superiority  of  one  grain  over  another  must  there- 
fore depend,  in  large  measure,  if  it  exists  at  all,  on  some  factor  other 
than  composition.  It  has  been  urged  by  many  that  oats  possess  a 
peculiar  stimulating  body  called  "avenin,"  and  are  on  this  account 
superior  to  other  grains  for  horses.  Oats  undoubtedly  possess  a 
flavor  or  some  such  characteristic  which  makes  them  a  favorite  food 
with  horses,  but  the  most  careful  chemical  study  has  failed  to  reveal 
any  substance  of  the  nature  of  the  theoretical  avenin.  Recent  experi- 
ments" have  shown  that  the  fat  of  oats  and  oat  straw  is  more  thoroughly 
digested  than  that  of  other  cereals.  This  is  suggested  as  a  possible 
explanation  of  the  superior  feeding  value  of  oats. 


«Landw.  Jahrb.,  29  (1900),  p.  483. 


16- 

It  is  believed  by  many  that  horses  show  more  spirit  when  oats  form 
part  of  the  ration.  Discussing  this  subject,  Director  W.  A.  Henry, a 
of  the  Wisconsin  Experiment  Station,  says: 

Horses  nurtured  on  oats  show  mettle  which  can  not  be  reached  by  the  use  of  any 
other  feeding  stuff.  Then,  too,  there  is  no  grain  so  safe  for  horse  feeeding,  the  ani- 
mal rarely  being  seriously  injured  if  by  accident  or  otherwise  the  groom  deals  out 
an  oversupply.  This  safety  is  due  in  no  small  measure  to  the  presence  of  the  oat 
hull,  which  causes  a  given  weight  of  grain  to  possess  considerable  volume,  because 
of  which  there  is  less  liability  of  mistake  in  measuring  out  the  ration;  further,  the 
digestive  tract  can  not  hold  a  quantity  of  oat  grains  sufficient  to  produce  serious  dis- 
orders. Unless  the  horse  is  hard  pressed  for  time  or  has  poor  teeth  oats  should  be 
fed  in  the  whole  condition.     Musty  oats  should  be  avoided. 

Horsemen  generally  agree  that  new  oats  should  not  be  used,  though  Boussingault, 
conducting  extensive  experiments  with  army  horses,  arrived  at  the  conclusion  that 
new  oats  do  not  possess  the  injurious  qualities  attributed  to  them. 

In  the  opinion  of  Lavalard:^ 

Not  only  may  single  grains  and  other  single  foods  be  substituted  for  oats,  but  more 
or  less  complex  mixtures  may  be  used  as  well.  We  believe  that  both  from  a  hygi- 
enic and  an  economic  standpoint  our  experiments  have  settled  this  matter,  which 
has  provoked  so  much,  discussion.  An  examination  of  the  statistics  we  have  gath- 
ered in  the  last  thirty-five  years  show  that,  although  a  great  saving  has  been  effected, 
it  has  not  been  at  the  expense  of  the  productive  power  of  the  horses. 

Boussingault,  perhaps,  first  suggested  on  the  basis  of  experiments 
that  other  materials  may  be  substituted  for  oats  in  the  ration  of 
horses.  He  prepared  a  table  of  nutritive  equivalents,  using  hay  as  a 
unit  of  comparison.  This  was  not  very  satisfactory,  since  the  com- 
position of  hay  varies  within  wide  limits. 

The  grain  most  commonly  substituted  for  oals  in  this  country  is 
Indian  corn  or  maize.  It  is  so  commonly  used,  especially  in  the  South 
and  West,  that  it  is  difficult  to  realize  the  prejudice  which  has  existed 
against  it  in  -other  countries.  It  has  been  asserted  that  there  are 
climatic  and  other  conditions  which  render  corn  a  suitable  horse  feed 
in  America  which  do  not  exist  elsewhere.  This  hardly  seems  reason- 
able, and  has  not  been  borne  out  by  the  numerous  experiments  under- 
taken in  France,  Germany,  and  other  countries.  Such  experiments 
have  demonstrated  the  value  of  corn  and  shown  the  truth  of  the 
opinions  generally  held  in  this  country,  namely,  that  it  is  a  safe  and 
satisfactory  feeding  stuff  for  horses. 

Barley,  rye,  and  wheat  are  sometimes  fed  to  horses.  Their  resem- 
blance to  oats  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  table.  All  these  grains 
should  be  substituted  on  the  basis  of  chemical  composition,  and  not 
pound  for  pound.  As  would  be  expected,  the  ground  grains  differ 
little  from  the  same  varieties  before  grinding. 

Bran,  shorts,  middlings,  and  other  by-products  vary  in  composition, 
but  all  have  a  low  water  content,  while  the  crude  fiber  content  is  gen- 

«  Feeds  and  Feeding,  Madison,  Wis.,  1898. 

b  Experiment  Station  Record,  12  (1900-1901),  p.  -L 


17 

(Mall  \  rather  high.  Their  nutritive  ingredients  are  principally  protein 
and  carbohydrates.  The  high  crude  fiber  content  Is  due  to  the  faci 
that  these  products  represent  the  outer  layer-  of  the  grain,  which  are 

more  hard  and  firm  in  construction  than  the  interior  portion,  which 
consists  largely  of  starch. 

The  total  Dumber  of  tests  to  compare  different  feeding  stuffs  for 
horses  which  have  been  undertaken  by  the  agricultural  experiment 
stations  in  the  United  States  is  not  large  compared  with  the  tests 
made  with  other  farm  animals.  The  results  obtained  are,  however, 
interesting.  Some  of  those  which  have  to  do  with  grain,  whole  and 
ground,  follow: 

At  the  Maine  Station  Jordan  a  made  a  comparison  with  oats  and  a 
mixture  of  one-third  pea  meal  and  two-thirds  middlings  for  Percheron 
colts.  No  advantage  was  observed  for  the  oats  over  the  mixture.  A 
comparison  of  oats  with  mixed  grains  (middlings,  gluten  meal,  and 
linseed  meal),  also  made  with  colts,  showed  that  considerably  larger 
gains  were  made  on  the  mixed  grain  ration,  which  was  also  the  more 
nitrogenous. 

At  the  Utah  Station  J.  W.  Sanborn6  tested  the  effect  of  feeding 
grains  (rye.  oats,  and  bran)  and  cut  hay,  mixed  and  separately.  So 
far  as  the  test  showed,  the  two  methods  of  feeding  were  equaU}T  satis- 
factory. No  regular  variation  in  the  weight  of  the  two  lots  of  horses 
was  observed  when  the  comparative  value  of  the  whole  and  cut  hay 
(alfalfa  and  clover  mixed)  was  tested. 

The  comparative  value  of  corn  and  oats  supplementing  bran  and 
hay  was  also  tested  at  the  Utah  Station/  The  grains  were  ground 
and  mixed  before  feeding.  In  these  and  other  tests  referred  to  above 
it  appears  that  during  the  summer  corn  and  timothy  were  not  as  good 
as  oats,  wheat,  and  clover  for  maintaining  horses.  During  the  winter 
corn  and  timothy  were  as  satisfactory  as  oats,  clover,  and  timothy  in 
maintaining  weight.  During  the  spring  and  summer  wheat  or  bran 
and  mixed  hay  produced  greater  gains  in  weight  than  oats,  wheat,  or 
bran  and  mixed  hay.  In  another  trial ll  corn  meal  and  timothy  hay 
did  not  sustain  work  horses  as  well  as  oats,  wheat,  and  clover  hay. 

The  value  of  oats  versus  bran  and  shorts,  the  feeding  value  of  wheat, 
wheat  versus  bran  and  ground  wheat,  were  tested  with  horses  and 
mules  b}T  J.  H.  Shepperd (  at  the  North  Dakota  Station.  Bran  and 
shorts  were  found  to  have  practically  the  same  feeding  value  as  oats. 
Unground  wheat  wTas  poorly  digested,  and  it  was  therefore  believed 
undesirable  to  feed  it  as  a  sole  grain  ration.  When  wheat  was  added 
to  a  ration  of  bran  and  shorts  1:1  no  advantage  was  gained.  On  the 
basis  of  tests  reported,  bran  and  ground  wheat  1 : 2  was  considered 

a Maine  Station  Rpt.  1890,  p.  68.  'Utah  Station  Rpt.  1892,  p.  30. 

&  Utah  Station  Bui.  13.  «  North  Dakota  Station  Bui.  20. 

cTJtah  Station  Bui.  36. 

17399— No.  125—03 2 


18 

a  more  satisfactory  grain  ration  for  horses  at  light  work  than  whole 
oats. 

The  New  Hampshire  Station  studied  the  value  of  different  grain 
mixtures  for  horses  with  the  view  to  determining  whether  the  cost  of 
a  ration  could  not  be  diminished  by  lessening  the  amount  of  oats  fed. 
The  rations  consisted  of  different  mixture-  of  oat-,  bran,  corn,  gluten 
ived,  linseed-oil  meal,  ami  cotton-seed  meal.  Fairly  good  results  were 
obtained  with  all  the  grain  mixture-,  the  mixture  containing  cotton- 
seed meal  being  Least  satisfactory,  a-  it  was  not  relished  at  first  by  the 
horse-.  It  i-  stated  by  C.  YV.  Burkett,  who  carried  on  the  tests,  that 
the  oat>  proved  no  more  satisfactory  than  the  other  concentrated  feed- 
ing stuffs,  either  in  respect  to  the  general  condition  of  the  animal  or 
the  efficiency  for  work,  and  the  conclusion  was  drawn  that  a  combi- 
nation of  feeding  stuffs,  furnishing  the  desired  nutriment  at  a  reason- 
able cost,  should  be  considered  in  preparing  rations  for  horses.  A 
mixture  of  bran  and  corn,  half  and  half,  is  regarded  as  a  good  substi- 
tute for  corn  and  oats  for  work  horses. 

In  a  study  of  alfalfa  hay  and  timothy  hay  for  horse>  at  the  Utah 
Station  *  the  comparative  merits  of  oats  and  a  mixture  of  bran  and 
shorts  were  also  tested.  The  conclusion  was  drawn  that  the  mixed 
grain  could  be  satisfactorily  substituted  for  oat-. 

The  barley  grown  on  the  Pacific  coast  is  extensively  used  in  the 
feeding  of  horses,  and  its  use  for  this  purpose  is  old  in  other  countries. 
Elsewhere  barley  is  not  extensively  used  as  a  feed  in  the  United  States. 
doubtless  owing  to  the  fact  that  it  is  in  such  demand  for  brewing  pur- 
poses that  it  is  usually  high  in  price.  Wherever  it  is  grown,  how- 
ever, it  is  frequently  possible  to  secure  at  a  low  cost  grain  which  is  off 
color  owing  to  rain  or  fog  during  harvest,  and  which,  for  this  or  some 
other  reason,  is  unlit  for  brewing,  but  valuable  as  feed. 

Barley  may  be  fed  whole  to  horses  having  good  teeth  and  not  required 
to  do  severe  work.  Since  ground  barley,  like  wheat,  forms  a  pasty 
mass  when  mixed  with  saliva  it  is  regarded  as  more  satisfactory  to 
crush  than  to  grind  it.  if  for  any  reason  it  is  considered  undesirable  to 
feed  the  grain  whole. 

At  the  North  Dakota  Station  J.  H.  Shepperd'  has  recently  studied 
the  value  of  barley  as  a  feed  for  work  horses  and  mules.  For  some 
months  this  grain  was  fed  with  timothy  hay  to  three  horses  and  two 
mules.  The  mules  did  not  eat  the  barley  with  marked  reli.-h  at  any 
time,  hut  for  two  months,  during  which  time  they  were  performing 
light  work,  they  ate  enough  to  keep  them  in  condition.  The  work  was 
then  increased,  hut  they  would  not  eat  a  correspondingly  greater  quan- 
tity of  barley,  and  soon  began  to  refuse  it  altogether  for  a  day  or  so 

"New  Hampshire  Station  Bui.  82.  ^  Xortk  Dakota  Station  Bui.  45. 

frUtah  Station  Bui.  77. 


19 

at  a  time.  The  mules  were  then  given  oats  on  alternate  months.  This 
grain  was  eaten  with  relish,  and  gains  in  weight  were  made.  Although 
the  trial  lasted  nine  months,  the  mules  persistently  refused  barley. 

Of  the  horses  mentioned  above,  two  were  work  horses.  They  were 
fed  alternately  barley  and  oats  with  timothy  hay  for  nine  periods  of 
twenty-eight  days  each.  They  ate  the  barley  without  regard  to  the 
amount  of  work  required  of  them.  On  the  oat  ration  there  was  an 
average  daily  gain  of  0.38  pound  per  horse.  On  the  barley  ration 
there  was  an  average  daily  gain  per  horse  of  0.15  pound.  In  both 
cases  the  horses  averaged  5.50  hours'  work  per  day. 

This  trial  indicates  that  horses,  when  taxed  to  the  limit  by  hard  work, 
can  not  he  supported  upon  barley  quite  so  well  as  upon  oats,  and  that 
it  is  worth  slightly  less  per  pound  than  oats  with  stock  which  is  given 
a  medium  amount  of  work.  It  indicates  further  that  mules  take  less 
kindly  to  barley  than  do  horses,  and  that  horses  which  are  inclined  to 
be  "dainty"  will  not  eat  barley  so  readily  as  oats. 

Malted  barley  was  compared  with  oats  in  a  trial  made  with  four 
work  horses.  The  two  grains  were  alternated,  in  different  periods.  Oat 
hay  was  supplied  as  coarse  fodder.  The  malted  barley  was  prepared 
as  follows:  After  soaking  in  water  for  twenty-four  hours  the  grain 
was  spread  on  the  floor  in  a  layer  6  inches  or  less  in  depth  and  allowed 
to  remain  until  the  sprouts  were  0.5  to  0.75  inch  long;  it  was  then  fed. 
On  the  oat  ration  there  was  a  daily  gain  of  0.49  pound,  and  on  the 
malted  barley  there  was  an  average  daily  loss  of  0.76  pound  per  horse. 
When  fed  malted  barley  the  horses  ate  0.1  pound  more  grain  than 
when  fed  oats.  In  this  test  the  horses  worked  between  five  and  six 
hours  per  day  on  an  average. 

A  mixture  of  malted  barley  and  bran  was  also  compared  with  oats, 
the  two  rations  being  alternated  as  above.  The  grains  were  mixed  in 
the  proportion  of  two  parts  of  barley  (before  malting)  to  one  part  of 
bran.  As  in  the  above  test,  oat  hay  was  fed  with  the  grain.  The 
horses  worked  some  seven  hours  per  dayr.  When  fed  a  barley  and  bran 
ration  they  ate  an  amount  equivalent  to  about  17.4  pounds  of  dry  grain 
per  day.  There  was  an  average  daily  loss  of  0.8  pound  per  horse. 
When  fed  the  oat  ration  an  average  of  16.2  pounds  was  consumed 
per  da}%  and  there  was  an  average  daily  gain  per  horse  of  0.22  pound. 
In  other  words,  the  horses  did  not  maintain  their  weight  on  the  bran 
and  malted  barley,  although  they  ate  a  larger  quantity  than  when  the 
oat  ration  was  fed. 

These  trials  indicate  that  malted  barley  is  not  an  economical  feed 
for  work  horses,  and  that  the  addition  of  1  part  bran  to  2  parts  of 
malt,  as  measured  by  the  dry  barley,  from  which  it  was  produced,  is 
neither  a  cheap  nor  satisfactory  feed  for  hard- worked  horses. 

Few  experiments  have  been  reported  on  the  feeding  value  of  Kafir 
corn  for  horses.     At  the  Oklahoma  Station,  according  to  Morrow  and 


20 

Bone,"  41  bushels  of  ground  Kafir  corn  were  fed  during-  a  year  to  a 
pair  of  work  horses  in  addition  to  other  grain  and  coarse  fodder. 
From  this  test  and  others  made  with  different  farm  animals  the  con- 
clusion was  drawn  that  Kafir  corn  is  a  healthful,  palatable,  and  nutri- 
tious feed  with  a  feeding  value  somewhat  less  than  that  of  corn.  This 
grain  is  very  flint}',  and  to  secure  the  best  results  should  be  ground. 
According  to  information  recently  received  from  the  station,  Kafir 
corn  is  highly  esteemed  local^  as  a  feed  for  horses,  many  being  kept 
throughout  the  year  on  this  grain  and  prairie  ha}'.  The  unthrashed 
heads  are  commonly  fed,  a  head  of  Kafir  corn  being  regarded  as 
equivalent  to  an  ear  of  corn. 

At  the  Mississippi  Station6  chicken  corn,  a  variety  of  Kafir  corn, 
was  compared  with  corn  meal  as  a  feed  for  mules  doing  heavy  work, 
mixed  hay  being  fed  in  addition  to  the  grain  ration.  The  mules  fed 
the  chicken  corn  lost  in  weight  a  little  more  than  those  fed  corn  meal. 
According  to  those  making  the  test  "the  feeding  value  of  the  chicken 
corn  is  about  as  high  as  that  of  the  corn." 

LEGUMINOUS  SEEDS. 

Beans  and  other  leguminous  seed  resemble  the  cereal  grains  in  hav- 
ing a  low  water  content.  In  Europe  horse  beans  are  common  feeding 
stuff  for  horses.     Lavalard  say s : c 

The  experiments  made  many  years  ago  for  the  Paris  cab  companies  warrant  the 
statement  that  when  beans  replace  oats,  only  half  the  quantity  should  be  used. 
Tests  made  with  army  horses  have  confirmed  this  conclusion.  The  chemical  compo- 
sition of  beans  shows  why  they  are  regarded  as  more  nutritious  than  oats  alone. 
Beans  may  be  advantageously  fed  to  horses  required  to  perform  long  continued,  sud- 
den, or  severe  labor.  The  opinion  is  prevalent  in  England  that  in  hunting  it  is  always 
possible  to  recognize  horses  fed  with  beans  by  their  great  endurance.  In  accord  with 
the  practice  of  the  leading  racing  stables,  we  used  a  large  proportion  of  beans  in  the 
ration  of  young  horses  which  were  being  trained.  The  results  obtained  were  most 
satisfactory. 

OIL  CAKES  AND  OTHER   COMMERCIAL  BY-PRODUCTS. 

The  various  cakes,  gluten  materials,  and  similar  feeding  stuffs  are, 
generally  speaking,  commercial  by-products.  Thus,  cotton-seed  cake 
is  the  material  left  after  the  oil  has  been  expressed  from  the  cotton 
seed.  In  the  same  way,  linseed  cake  is  the  residue  obtained  in  the 
manufacture  of  linseed  oil.  If  this  cake  is  ground  it  becomes  linseed 
meal.  In  the  manufacture  of  beer  the  malted  grain  is  known  as  brew- 
ers' grain  and  is  best  fed  after  drying.  When  starch  is  manufactured 
from  corn,  the  nitrogenous  portion  of  the  grain  is  rejected  and  consti- 
tutes gluten  feed  and  gluten  meal.  The  cereal  breakfast  food  com- 
panies have  placed  many  feeding  stuffs  upon  the  market  made  up  of 

a  Oklahoma  Station  Rpt.  1899,  p.  31.  cLoc.  cit. 

&  Mississippi  Station  Bui.  8. 


21 

various  by-products  obtained  in  the  manufacture  of  their  breakfast 
foods  and  similar  products.  These  feeding  stuffs  vary  in  value,  but 
may  generally  be  said  to  represent  the  branny  portion  of  the  grains 
from  which  they  are  derived. 

A  comparison  was  made  by  E.  B.  and  L.  A.  Voorhees0  of  dried 
brewers' grains  when  substituted  for  oats,  pound  for  pound,  at  the 
New  Jersey  stations,  eight  horses  heavily  worked  during  the  summer 
being  used.  As  shown  by  weight  and  general  condition  of  the  animals, 
the  brewers'  grains  were  fully  equal  to  the  oats,  pound  for  pound, 
while  their  cost  was  considerably  less.  In  a  second  trial,  dried 
brewers'  grains  were  compared  with  a  mixture  of  wheat  bran  and 
linseed  meal  5  :  1.5  when  fed  in  addition  to  timothy  hay  and  corn.  The 
uniformity  in  the  amount  of  feed  consumed  and  the  weight  of  the 
animals,  taken  in  connection  with  the  work  performed,  indicates  that 
there  was  no  material  difference  in  the  value  of  the  two  rations. 
According  to  calculations  made  (timothy  hay  at  the  time  being  worth 
$18,  wheat  bran  $17.50,  corn  meal  $22,  dried  brewers'  grain  $17,  and 
linseed  meal  $29  per  ton),  a  farm  horse  weighing  1,000  pounds  can  be 
fed  for  $30.84  during  the  six  months  of  the  year  when  the  most  work  is 
performed  if  dried  brewers'  grain  furnishes  the  bulk  of  the  necessary 
protein,  and  for  $33.49  if  wheat  bran  and  linseed  meal  are  the  chief 
sources  of  this  nutrient.  If  the  fertilizing  value  of  the  feeding  stuffs 
is  taken  into  account  the  difference  in  favor  of  the  brewers'  grains  is 
less  marked. 

In  tests  made  by  Emery b  at  the  North  Carolina  Station  horses  were 
satisfactorily  fed  2  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal  per  head  daily  as  part 
of  the  mixed  ration.  When  the  amount  was  increased  to  3.5  pounds 
the  results  were  not  as  favorable.  It  is  stated  that  neither  of  the 
horses  used  in  the  test  showed  amr  symptoms  which  indicated  that 
cotton -seed  meal  disagreed  with  them.  It  is  also  stated  that  at  the 
Biltmore  estate  2  pounds  of  cotton-seed  meal  per  head  daily  were  fed 
to  the  horses  and  mules  with  13  to  15  pounds  of  cut  ha}T  and  finely  cut 
corn  feed,  4  pounds  of  wheat  bran,  and  6  pounds  of  corn  meal.  On 
Sundays  the  ration  was  made  up  of  whole  corn  and  oats  and  uncut  hay. 
According  to  later  information  the  feeding  of  cotton-seed  meal  has  not 
been  found  satisfactory  at  Biltmore.  In  the  tests  with  mixed  rations, 
carried  on  at  the  New  Hampshire  Station  (p.  18),  the  cotton-seed  mix- 
ture was  least  satisfactory. 

In  the  opinion  of  Director  Stubbs, c  of  the  Louisiana  stations,  cotton- 
seed meal  may  be  fed  with  satisfactoiy  results  to  horses  and  mules. 
At  the  Louisiana  stations  1  or  2  pounds  per  mule  per  day  have  been 
fed  with  success.     Six  pounds  is  regarded  as  the  maximum  quantity 

"New  Jersey  Stations  Bui.  92,  Rpt.  1893,  p.  179. 
^  North  Carolina  Station  Bui.  109. 
c  Louisiana  Planter,  28  (1902),  p.  178. 


22 

which  it  is  desirable  to  feed,  and,  in  Director  Stubbs's  opinion,  this 
amount  should  be  led  up  to  gradually.  He  notes  that  only  bright  yel- 
low cotton-seed  meal  of  a  nutty,  pleasant  odor  and  taste  should  be 
used,  and  that  no  reddish  or  musty  meal  should  be  fed.  It  is  stated 
that  excessive  quantities  of  cotton-seed  meal  should  be  avoided,  since 
it  is  a  very  concentrated  feed.  It  should  be  gradually  added  to  a 
ration,  carefully  mixed  with  other  feeds,  until  mules  learn  to  relish  it, 
and  no  uneaten  residues  should  be  allowed  to  ferment  in  the  feed  boxes. 
The  cereal  grains,  ground  and  unground,  commercial  by-products, 
leguminous  seeds,  oil  cakes,  and  similar  products  are  very  frequently 
called  concentrated  feeds,  the  name  being  suggested  I)}-  the  fact  that, 
generally  speaking,  the  food  value,  especially  the  protein  content,  is 
high  in  comparison  with  the  bulk.  So  far  as  the  general  experience 
and  the  results  of  American  and  foreign  feeding  experiments  go,  most 
of  the  common  feeding  stuffs  in  the  group  are  wholesome  and  valuable 
for  horses.  If  any  one  of  these  feeding  stuffs  is  substituted  for  oats, 
which  may  be  taken  for  a  standard,  the  substitution  should  be  propor- 
tional to  the  composition  of  the  two  feeds  and  not  pound  for  pound. 

FORAGE  CROPS,  FR*ESH  AND  CURED. 

The  various  forage  crops — grass,  clover,  Kafir  corn,  corn,  etc. — all 
have  a  high  water  content;  that  is,  they  are  more  or  less  succulent 
and  juicy.  They  contain,  however,  considerable  nutritive  material, 
usually  protein  and  carbohydrates,  and  are  valuable  feeding  stuffs. 

The  leguminous  forage  crops — alfalfa,  clover,  cowpeas,  soy  beans, 
vetch,  etc. — are  richer  in  protein  than  the  grasses.  When  the  forage 
crops  are  dried  and  cured  the  resulting  hay  is  richer  in  proportion  to 
its  bulk  than  the  green  material:  in  other  words,  it  has  been  concen- 
trated by  the  evaporation  of  the  greater  part  of  the  water  present. 
However,  this  is  not  the  only  change  which  has  taken  place.  When 
hay  is  properly  cured  it  undergoes  a  peculiar  sort  of  fermentation  or 
oxidation  which  materially  affects  its  composition. 

As  shown  by  Holdefleis's a  recent  investigations,  fermentation 
improves  the  hay  by  diminishing  the  quantity  of  crude  fiber  and  by 
increasing  the  relative  amount  of  other  nutrients,  especially  nitrogen- 
free  extract.  The  greater  the  fermentation  the  more  the  crude  fiber 
is  diminished,  and  this  is  especially  marked  when  hay  is  dried  on 
racks.  Hay  which  has  undergone  proper  fermentation  has  a  better 
flavor  and  agrees  better  with  animals  and  is  apparently  more  digesti- 
ble than  hay  which  has  dried  quickly  in  the  sun  without  fermentation. 
Fermentation  apparently  diminishes  the  amount  of  pentosans  in  hay. 
especially  in  the  case  of  hay  from  grasses.  It  also  seems  that  the 
relative  amount  of  true  protein  is  increased. 

"Mitt,  Landw.  Inst.  Univ.  Breslan,  1899,  p.  59. 


23 

The  feeding  value  of  different  forage  crops,  fresh  and  cured,  depends 
in  considerable  degree  upon  the  stage  of  growth,  as  has  been  shown 
by  a  number  of  chemical  studies  of  the  composition  of  different  crops 
and  cuttings  of  alfalfa,  young  and  more  matured  corn  forage,  etc. 
Generally  speaking,  the  nutritive  value  of  the  crop  increases  until 
growth  is  complete  and  diminishes  somewhat  as  the  plants  mature  or 
become  overripe.  Straw,  the  fully  ripened  stalk  of  cereal  grains, 
contains  some  nutritive  material,  but  is  less  nutritious  than  the  same 
portion  of  the  plant  (ait  before  ripening.  In  the  perfectly  ripe  con- 
dition the  nutritive  material,  elaborated  in  different  portions  of  the 
ordinary  forage  plants,  has  been  conveyed  to  the  seed  and  used  for  its 
development  or  stored  as  reserve  material. 

Green  forage  crops  are  frequently  preserved  by  ensiling.  In  this 
process  the  material  undergoes  a  peculiar  oxidation  which  correspond- 
ingly changes  it  in  composition  and  food  value.  Some  of  the  carbo- 
hydrates are  changed  into  alcohol,  acetic  and  other  acids,  and  crude 
fiber  is  undoubtedly  softened  somewhat,  and  possibly  the  silage  is  thus 
rendered  more  digestible.  Bodies  having  peculiar  flavor  and  odor  are 
also  formed. 

The  green  crops,  hay,  straw,  other  cured  crops,  and  silage  are  fre- 
quently called  "  coarse  fodder"  or  "  roughage."  This  term  is  due  to 
the  fact  that  the}T  contain  a  comparatively  small  amount  of  nutritive 
material  and  a  high  proportion  of  crude  fiber  as  compared  with  their 
total  bulk.  Although  inferior  to  concentrated  feeds  in  composition, 
they  are  an  essential  part  of  the  ration  of  horses  and  other  farm  ani- 
mals, serving  to  give  the  required  bulk  to  the  food  and  being  useful  in 
other  ways. 

It  is  believed  that  unless  the  food,  when  taken  into  the  stomach,  is 
comparatively  bulky  and  the  mass  is  more  or  less  loose  in  structure, 
it  is  not  readily  acted  on  by  the  digestive  juices.  The  intestinal  tract 
of  the  horse  is  long  in  proportion  to  the  size  of  the  animal,  and  food 
remains  in  it  for  several  days.  Experiments  indicate  that  crude  fiber, 
which  is  only  slightly  digestible  by  man,  is  quite  thoroughly  digested 
by  horses,  and  even  more  thoroughly  digested  by  ruminants,  owing  its 
digestibility^  to  the  fact  that  it  is  fermented  for  a  comparativehT  long 
period  by  micro-organisms  in  the  intestines. 

Regarding  the  need  of  straw  in  a  ration  to  supply  the  necessary  bulk, 
LavalardV'  opinion  follows: 

The  statement  is  often  made  that  horses  can  not  do  without  straw  [to  supply  coarse 
fodder].  This  is  an  error,  for  we  have  fed  horses  hay  and  oats  during  very  long 
periods,  and  have  never  noticed  that  they  suffered  any  inconvenience  or  detriment. 
This  is  a  matter  of  importance,  since  it  is  often  inconvenient  to  obtain  straw  [even 
for  bedding],  and  in  such  cases  peat,  sawdust,  sand,  etc.,  may  be  profitably  used  as 
bedding  in  place  of  straw. 


«Loc.  cit. 


24 

This  does  not  mean  that  crude  fiber,  one  of  the  important  constitu- 
ents of  coarse  fodder,  is   not   required,  but   rather  that  a  sufficient 
amount  of  crude  fiber  was  supplied   by  the  hay  and  oats  in  the  c 
cited  by  the  author.      As  part  of  a  series  comprising  some  fifteen 

experiments  carried  on  at  the  Maryland  Station."  an  attempt  was  made 
to  feed  the   horses  <>n   oat- alone.      At  the   beginning  of  the   trial  one 

horse  consumed  6, grams  (13.2  pounds)  and  the  other  6,750  grams 

( 14.:*  pounds)  of  oat-  per  day.  but  after  a  few  days  refused  to  eat.  The 
experiment  could  not  be  continued  long  enough  to  permit  the  determi- 
nation of  the  coefficients  of  digestibility.  Under  the  experimental 
conditions  it  was  regarded  as  impossible  to  maintain  horses  on  a  grain 
ration  alone:  it  seemed  certain  that  they  required  some  coarse  fodder 
in  addition.  From  such  experiments  the  general  deduction  is  obvious 
that  the  common  practice  of  feeding  horses  on  a  ration  of  grain  and 
coarse  fodder  is  reasonable  and  based  on  the  actual  physiological 
requirements  of  the  animal. 

A  number  of  feeding  experiments  have  been  made  on  the  compara- 
tive value  for  horses  of  different  forage  crops,  fresh  and  cured.  The 
American  experiment  stations  have  studied  the  more  important  coarse 
fodders  in  use  in  this  country.     A  summary  of  their  work  follows. 

D.  O.  Nourse  h  of  the  Virginia  Station  reported  a  number  of  trials 
of  the  value  of  corn  silage  for  horses  and  mules.  Gradually  increas- 
ing amounts  were  fed  until  they  were  given  all  the  silage  they  could 
eat.  with  hay  and  grain  in  addition.  Provided  animals  are  gradually 
accustomed  to  it.  as  shown  by  these  tests,  silage  is  a  satisfactory  feed 
for  horses  and  mules. 

In  tests  carried  on  by  J.  H.  Shepperd''  at  the  North  Dakota  Station 
oat  straw  and  prairie  hay  were  compared.  Oat  straw  was  found  to  be 
a  cheaper  horse  fodder  than  hay.  but  when  it  was  used  more  careful 
feeding  was  necessary  to  keep  the  horses  in  good  condition.  In  a 
subsequent  test d  brome  grass  hay  gave  as  good  results  when  fed  to 
work  horses  as  timothy  hay. 

In  a  study  of  different  grain  mixtures  for  work  horses,  carried  on 
at  the  New  Hampshire  Station.'  the  relative  merits  of  timothy  hay 
and  corn  stover  were  also  studied.  The  rations  consisted  of  12  pounds 
of  hay  and  corn  stover  alone  or  mixed,  fed  with  14  pounds  of  mixed 
grain.  During  the  test,  which  covered  nearly  three  months,  the  two 
sorts  of  coarse  fodder  were  found  equally  satisfactory.  Although  the 
corn  stover  cost  only  one-third  as  much  as  the  timothy  hay.  the  con- 
clusion was  drawn  that  it  has  a  feeding  value  equal  to  timothy  hay  fed 
with  suitable  mixtures  of  either  corn  and  oats  or  corn  and  bran,  and 
that  when  corn  stover  or  timothy  hay  supplied  the  coarse  fodder  in  a 

Maryland  Station  Bui.  51.  ''North  Dakota  Station  Bui.  45. 

''Virginia  Station  Bui.  80.  <  New  Hampshire  Station  Bui.  82. 

eNorth  Dakota  Station  Bui.  20. 


25 

ration,  oats  and  corn,  half  and  half,  and  bran  and  corn,  half  and  half, 
have  generally  equivalent  feeding  values. 

Bermuda  grass  hay  and  timothy  hay,  tVd  in  addition  to  corn,  wnv 
compared  with  working  mules  at  the  Mississippi  Station."  No  marked 
differences  in  the  cost  of  the  rations  nor  in  the  gains  made  by  the 
mules  were  observed. 

The  Oklahoma  Station  b  reports  a  test  in  which  Kafir  corn  stover  was 
fed  to  horses  and  mules,  the  amount  eaten  by  the  horses  averaging 
some  32  pounds  per  day  and  by  the  mules  some  41  pounds.  From 
this  and  tests  of  other  farm  animals  the  conclusion  was  drawn  that 
Kafir  corn  stover  is  about  equal  in  feeding  value  to  corn  stover,  and 
that  running  stalks  through  a  thrashing  machine  is  a  satisfactory 
method  of  preparing  this  feeding  stuff. 

At  the  Utah  Station c  a  ration  of  timothy  hay  and  grain  was  com- 
pared with  one  consisting  of  clover,  oats,  and  wheat,  two  lots  of  work 
horses  being  used.  The  nutritive  ratio  of  the  first  ration  was  1:14.8; 
of  the  second,  1:5.5.  For  more  than  half  the  test  the  grains  wrere  fed 
unground.  Somewhat  better  results  were  obtained  with  a  ration  hav- 
ing the  narrower  nutritive  ratio.  However,  in  a  second  test,^  the 
ration  having  a  wide  nutritive  ratio  (1:15.2)  gave  results  as  satisfactory 
as  the  one  having  a  narrower  ratio  (1:7.8). 

Later,  at  the  Utah  Station,  the  comparative  merits  of  alfalfa  hay  and 
timothy  hay  were  investigated  by  L.  A.  Merrill6  in  tests  with  work 
horses  and  driving  horses,  which  extended  over  four  years.  In  some  of 
the  tests  as  much  as  25  pounds  of  alfalfa  or  timothy  hay  with  10  pounds 
of  bran  and  shorts  was  fed  per  head  daily.  In  other  tests  the  amount 
of  hay  was  considerably  smaller  and  the  amount  of  grain  larger.  In 
some  cases  oats  were  fed  instead  of  bran  and  shorts.  Generally  speak- 
ing, the  timotlry  ration  was  the  more  expensive  and  the  horses  did  not 
maintain  their  weight  on  it  as  well  as  on  the  alfalfa  ration. 

Tests  were  also  made  in  which  the  feeding  value  of  an  alfalfa  ration 
without  grain  was  studied.  It  was  found  that  20  pounds  of  this  mate- 
rial was  sufficient  to  maintain  the  weight  of  a  horse  weighing  nearly 
1,400  pounds,  provided  no  work  was  performed.  When  at  hard  work 
some  33  pounds  of  alfalfa  ha}T  was  barely  sufficient  to  maintain  the 
weight.  When  the  work  was  very  severe  40  pounds  of  alfalfa  hay  was 
not  an  adequate  ration,  although  it  was  about  the  limit  which  could  be 
eaten.  Regarding  the  experiments,  the  statement  was  made  in  effect 
that  it  is  doubtful  if  there  is  any  econom}T  in  feeding  a  horse  40  pounds 
of  alfalfa  per  day.  It  is  certain  that  better  results  can  be  secured  by 
limiting  the  amount  of  ha}T  to  20  pounds  and  substituting  for  the  extra 
20  pounds  enough  grain  to  make  up  the  cost.     This  would  secure  at 

a  Mississippi  Station  Bui.  15.  <'  Utah  Station  Bui.  30. 

^Oklahoma  Station  Rpt.  1899,  p.  18.  *Utah  Station  Bui.  77. 

cUtah  Station  Rpt.  1892,  p.  30. 


26 

current  prices  [1902]  8  pounds  of  bran  and  shorts  or  3.6  pounds  of  oats 
per  day,  and  this  amount  with  20  pounds  of  alfalfa  will  make  a  better 
maintenance  ration  than  40  pounds  of  alfalfa.  Aside  from  the  finan- 
cial consideration  it  should  be  emphasized  that  if  digestive  disorders 
are  to  be  entirely  avoided  concentrated  foods  must  make  up  part  of 
the  diet  of  the  horse. 

Considered  as  a  whole  the  experiments  are  very  favorable  to  the 
use  of  alfalfa  hay  as  a  coarse  fodder  for  horses.  The  fact  is  recog- 
nized that,  like  other  leguminous  crops,  it  contains  a  larger  amount 
of  protein  in  proportion  to  its  bulk  than  timothy.  Feeding  alfalfa 
did  not  exercise  any  bad  effects  on  the  health  of  the  horses.  It  is 
stated  that  attacks  of  colic  and  other  digestive  disorders  can  be  pre- 
vented by  a  judicious  system  of  feeding.  The  amount  of  hay  fed  on 
most  Utah  farms,  it  is  believed,  could  be  reduced  at  least  one-half. 
It  may  be  economical  to  reduce  the  amount  of  ha}'  and  increase  the 
amount  of  grain  fed  to  horses.     In  this  connection  the  author  says: 

It  is  folly  to  claim  that  a  horse  will  not  eat  more  than  is  necessary  if  allowed  the 
liberty  of  the  stack  and  the  grain  bin.  The  argument  is  sometimes  made  that  a 
horse  under  natural  conditions,  on  pasture,  never  eats  more  than  is  necessary,  and 
that  under  these  conditions  he  is  never  subject  to  digestive  disorders.  While  this  is 
undoubtedly  true,  it  must  be  kept  in  mind  that  as  soon  as  we  stable  the  horse  and 
require  work  of  him,  we  have  taken  him  away  from  his  natural  condition  and  placed 
him  under  unnatural  environments. 

It  was  observed  that  larger  amounts  of  water  were  consumed  on  the 
alfalfa  ration  and  that  the  amount  of  urine  excreted  was  also  larger 
and  had  a  higher  specific  gravity.  The  excess,  however,  was  never 
found  great  enough  to  cause  any  inconvenience.  These  experiments 
at  the  Utah  Station  are  especially  interesting  since  they  confirm  the 
results  of  twelve  years'  practical  tests  of  the  feeding  value  of  alfalfa. 
During  this  period  the  station  horses  have  always  received  this 
material  as  a  coarse  fodder,  except  when  they  were  fed  other  rations 
for  experimental  purposes. 

From  a  study  of  the  comparative  digestibility  of  alfalfa  hay  and 
meadow  hay  by  horses,  Muntz  and  Girarda  concluded  that  the  former 
is  superior  as  regards  nitrogenous  constituents  and  the  latter  as  regards 
carbohydrates. 

In  studies  at  the  Wyoming  Station,  undertaken  by  F.  E.  EmeiyHo 
determine  what  constituted  maintenance  rations  for  horses  performing 
little  work,  alfalfa  hay  constituted  the  principal  feed,  no  grain  being 
supplied.  It  was  found  that  farm  horses  required  to  perform  very 
little  work  maintained  their  weight  on  an  average  daily  ration,  per 
1,000  pounds  live  weight,  of  13.75  pounds  alfalfa  hay  and  2.25  pounds 
oat  straw.  A  driving  horse  maintained  his  weight  on  a  daily  ration 
of  17.71  pounds  alfalfa  hay  and  2.83  pounds  oat  straw  per  1,000  pounds 
live  weight. 


«Ann.  Agron.,  24  (1898),  p.  5.  &  Wyoming  Station  Press  Buls.  n.  ser.  5,  10. 


27 

In  discussing  the  subject  of  alfalfa  for  horses,  the  California  Station" 
says  in  effect  that  in  regions  where  it  is  a  staple  crop  the  quantity  of 
protein  which  can  be  supplied  in  green  and  cured  alfalfa  is  SO  great 
that  much  less  grain  is  required  than  when  the  coarse  fodder  consists 
of  cereal  hays  only.  For  the  Pacific  coast,  where  cereal  hays  replace 
so  largely  those  from  meadow  grasses,  the  station  recommends  a  ration 
of  alfalfa  hay  with  wheat  hay  or  barley  hay  and  grain. 

In  a  recent  discussion  of  the  problem  of  horse  feeding  under  local 
conditions.  Director  Stubbs,6of  the  Louisiana  stations,  emphasizes  the 
value  of  cowpea  vine  hay. 

The  outcome  of  the  different  experiments  is  in  accord  with  the 
observation  of  careful  feeders,  viz,  that  the  various  common  coarse 
fodders  may  be  fed  to  horses  as  circumstances  demand.  Although 
timothy  hay  is  in  many  regions  regarded  as  the  preferable  coarse  feed, 
yet  experience  has  shown  that  corn  fodder,  ha}r  from  wheat,  barley,  and 
other  cereal  grains,  and  from  clover,  and  alfalfa  may  be  substituted  for 
it.  That  this  is  what  might  be  expected  is  shown  by  a  study  of  the  com- 
position of  these  feeding  stuffs.  As  will  be  seen  by  reference  to  the 
table  above  (p.  13),  they  resemble  each  other  very  closely  in  the  char- 
acter and  amount  of  nutrients  which  they  contain — alfalfa,  clover, 
and  other  leguminous  hays  being  richer  in  protein  than  the  cured 
grasses  and  cereal  forage.  Straw  is  not  much  fed  to  horses  in  the 
United  States,  but  is  a  common  feeding  stuff  in  Europe.  As  shown  by 
its  composition  and  digestibility  (pp.  11,  41),  it  compares  quite  favor- 
abhT  with  other  coarse  fodders.  The  substitution  of  one  coarse  fodder 
for  another  in  a  ration  should  always  be  made  on  the  biisis  of  compo- 
sition and  digestibility,  rather  than  pound  for  pound. 

Very  few  tests  have  been  made  on  the  comparative  value  of  differ- 
ent uncured  feeds  or  different  sorts  of  pasturage  in  horse  feeding, 
though  all  the  common  forage  crops  are  regarded  as  wholesome  if 
properly  fed.     In  discussing  green  crops  for  horses,  cLavalard  says: 

Such  feed  is  very  dependent  upon  the  fertilizer  used  for  the  crop,  the  method  of 
harvesting,  and  the  condition  of  the  animal  fed.  Green  fodder  does  not  contain 
sufficient  nutritive  material  to  make  it  in  any  real  sense  a  feeding  stuff  for  horses 
performing  much  work.  The  same  may  be  said  of  certain  plants  which  have  been 
much  advertised  from  time  to  time,  such  as  furze,  couch  grass  [sacchaline],  etc. 

ROOTS  AND  TUBERS. 

Carrots,  Swedish  turnips  or  ruta-bagas,  and  other  roots  and  tubers, 
green  vegetables,  and  fruits  contain  a  high  percentage  of  water  and 
small  amounts  of  the  different  classes  of  nutrients.  Generally  speak- 
ing, the  percentage  of  crude  fiber  is  smaller  than  in  the  green  forage 
crops;  but  since  the  proportion  of  nutritive  material  is  small  in  com- 
parison with  the  total  bulk,  they  are  ordinarily  referred  to  as  coarse 


"California  Station  Bui.  132. 

&Loc.  cit. 

c  Experiment  Station  Record,  12  (1900-1901),  p.  4. 


28 

fodder.  The  use  of  these  materials  as  food  for  horses  has  been 
attempted  at  different  times  with  varying  success,  but  it  is  not  fol- 
lowed to  any  great  extent  in  this  country.  In  the  opinion  of  a  recent 
German  writer,  about  L2  pounds  of  raw  potatoes  per  1,000  pounds  live 
weight  may  be  fed  to  horses  with  advantage  and,  if  supplemented 
with  proper  feed,  there  need  be  no  fear  of  physiological  disturbances. 
When  fed  in  this  amount  the  potatoes  should  be  mixed  with  hay  or 
cut  straw  to  insure  their  being  properly  chewed.  If  small,  they  may  be 
fed  whole;  if  large,  they  should  be  sliced.  In  any  case  only  healthy. 
ripe,  unsprouted  tubers  should  be  used.  It  is  said  that  horses  should 
not  be  watered  immediately  after  a  ration  containing  potatoes. 

MOLASSES  AND  OTHER  BY-PRODUCTS  OF  SUGAR  MAKING. 

The  beet  chips,  diffusion  residue,  and  other  by-products  obtained  in 
the  manufacture  of  beet  sugar,  consist  of  the  sugar  beet  from  which  a 
considerable  portion  of  the  carbohydrates  has  been  removed.  The 
total  amount  of  nutritive  material  present,  however,  is  fairly  large. 
These  products,  property  speaking,  are  also  coarse  fodders.  Molasses, 
which  consists  almost  entirely  of  carbohydrates  (sugars),  was  used  as 
early  as  1830  as  a  feed  for  horses,  and  has  recently  attracted  consider- 
able attention  in  this  connection.  When  used  for  this  purpose  it  is 
usually  sprinkled  on  dry  feed,  being  first  diluted  with  water,  or  it  is 
mixed  with  some  material  which  absorbs  it  and  renders  it  easy  to 
handle,  such  as  peat  dust,  or  with  some  material  rich  in  nitrogen,  as 
dried  blood.  In  the  latter  case  the  mixture  more  nearly  represents  a 
concentrated  feed  than  the  molasses  alone,  or  molasses  mixed  with  an 
absorbent  material  only.  Cane-sugar  molasses  is  also  used  as  a  feed- 
ing stuff.  It  differs  from  beet  molasses  in  that  it  contains  glucose  in 
addition  to  cane  sugar,  and  has  a  much  smaller  percentage  of  salts. 

In  this  connection  the  experiments  reporting  the  successful  feed- 
ing of  cane  molasses  to  over  400  work  horses  at  a  sugar  plantation  in 
the  Fiji  Islands a  are  of  interest.  As  high  as  30  pounds  of  molasses 
was  fed  per  head  daily  at  different  times,  but  the  ration  finally  adopted 
consisted  of  15  pounds  of  molasses,  3  pounds  of  bran,  and  -4  pounds  of 
maize.  In  addition,  green  sugar  cane  tops  were  fed.  The  health  of 
the  horses  remained  excellent.  Molasses  did  not  cause  diarrhea,  but 
rather  constipation,  which  was  counteracted  by  feeding  bran.  Feeding 
molasses  effected  a  saving  of  over  $45  per  head  per  annum.  However, 
it  was  believed  that  such  a  saving  was  possible  only  by  reason  of 
large  quantities  of  waste  molasses  and  valueless  cane  tops  available  on 
the  spot.  In  discussing  tnese  experiments  the  following  statements 
were  made: 

For  working  horses  the  sugar  in  cane  molasses  is  a  satisfactory  substitute  for  starchy 
food,  being  readily  digested  *  *  *  and  15  pounds  can  be  given  to  a  1,270-pound 
working  horse  with  advantage  to  the  health  of  the  animal  and  to  the  efficiency  of  its 

«Agr.  Gaz.  New  South  Wales,  9  (1898),  p.  169. 


29 

work.  It  produces  do  undue  fattening,  softness,  nor  injury  to  tiif  wind.  The  high 
proportion  of  salts  in  it  has  no  injurioos  effect.  An  albuminoid  ratio  as  low  as  L:11.8 
has  proved  highly  suitable  for  heavy  continuous  work  when  a  sufficient  quantity  of 
digestible  matter  is  given. 

According  to  W.  C.  Stubbs,a  of  tin1  Louisiana  stations,  cane-sugar 
molasses  has  been  used  extensively  with  success  for  a  number  of  years 
for  feeding  horses  and  mules  in  Louisiana,  many  feeders  keeping 
mules  exclusively  on  a  ration  of  rice  bran  and  molasses  in  addition  to 
cowpea  hay.  The  general  custom  is  to  feed  the  molasses  from  a  large 
trough,  allowing  the  mules  to  cat  it  ad  libitum.  It  is  said  they  will  con- 
sume with  apparent  relish  from  8  to  12  pounds  per  head  daily.  The 
mules  at  the  Louisiana  stations  have  been  fed  molasses  daily  ad  libitum 
for  eight  or  ten  years,  and,  according  to  Director  Stubbs,  show  its  good 
effects  "in  their  splendid  condition,  lively  action,  and  endurance  of 
work." 

In  this  connection  it  is  interesting  to  note  the  results  obtained  by 
G.  E.  Griffin  b  in  the  experimental  feeding  of  cane-sugar  molasses  to 
army  horses  in  Porto  Kico.  In  accordance  with  the  local  custom,  this 
material  was  fed  with  chopped  grass,  the  ration  being  gradualhT  sub- 
stituted for  the  usual  ration  of  oats  and  hay.  The  molasses  was  diluted 
with  25  per  cent  of  water,  and  as  much  as  possible  was  mixed  with  the 
chopped  grass.  The  remainder  was  added  to  the  drinking  water.  The 
test  reported  continued  some  five  months  and  led  to  the  deduction  that 
35  pounds  of  grass  and  13  to  15  pounds  of  molasses  daily  per  1,000 
pounds  live  weight  is  sufficient  to  maintain  a  horse  in  good  condition 
in  a  climate  like  that  of  Porto  Rico.  This  method  of  feeding,  it  was 
believed,  had  some  disadvantages,  which  were  as  follows: 

Molasses  attracts  insects,  notably  flies  and  ants;  it  sticks  to  the  animal's  coat, 
smears  his  face  and  breast,  halter  and  halter  strap,  soils  the  clothing  and  equipment 
of  the  men,  and  causes  some  trouble  and  delay  in  mixing  it  with  the  grass,  which 
must  be  cut  fine. 

G.  H.  Bernsc  reports  the  successful  feeding  of  molasses  to  100  .draft 
horses  working  ten  hours  a  day  hauling  very  heavy  loads  usually  at  a 
walk.  The  horses  averaged  1,700  pounds  in  weight  and  were  fed  per 
head,  night  and  morning,  1  quart  of  molasses  diluted  with  3  quarts  of 
water  and  thoroughly  mixed  with  6  pounds  of  cut  hay  of  good  qual- 
ity, 1.5  quarts  of  corn  meal,  and  2.5  quarts  of  coarse  bran.  In  addi- 
tion they  were  fed  5  quarts  of  dry  oats  in  the  middle  of  the  day  and 
11  pounds  of  long  hay  at  night.  It  is  stated  that  the  horses  gradually 
improved  in  condition  and  gained  in  weight  during  the  fourteen  months 
covered  by  the  test,  their  coats  becoming  sleek  and  glossy,  while  the 
amount  of  work  performed  was  the  same  as  before  the  molasses  ration 
was  adopted.     In  the  meantime  their  general  health  is  said  to  have 

«Loc.  cit.  c'Amer.  Vet.  Rev.,  26  (1902-3),  p.  615. 

&Amer.  Vet.  Rev.,  25  (1901-2),  p.  894. 


30 

been  excellent,  and  cases  of  acute  indigestion  or  spasmodic  colic  very 
rare,  although   formerly  quite    frequent.     The  molasses   ration  was 

decided  upon  after  its  value  had  been  demonstrated  in  a  test  with  two 
horses.  A  ration  similar  to  the  above  was  also  fed  with  success  to  a 
number  of  driving  horses. 

In  general,  do  disturbance  was  observed  in  changing  from  an  ordi- 
nary to  a  molasses  ration.  As  part  of  a  mixed  ration,  the  author 
calculates  that  1  quart  of  molasses  will  replace  3  to  4  quarts  of  oats  of 
good  quality.  He  believes  that  "  molasses  of  a  good  quality  is  a  most 
nutritious  food  for  horses,  easily  digested  and  assimilated,  and  will  in 
many  eases  correct  faulty  digestive  processes,"  and  that  "molasses- 
fed  horses  will  do  fully  as  much  work  and  at  the  same  time  remain,  as 
a  rule,  in  much  better  general  condition  than  animals  fed  on  dry  food, 
while  the  cost  of  feeding  is  reduced  from  25  to  33  per  cent." 

A-  an  outgrowth  of  this  work  Dr.  Berns  states  that  molasses  has 
been  successfully  fed,  under  his  direction,  to  2,500  or  3,000  horses. 

The  value  of  beet-sugar  molasses  as  a  part  of  a  ration  for  horses  and 
other  farm  animals  was  tested  several  years  ago  by  Dickson  and  Mal- 
peaux  a  in  France.  The  test  with  horses  was  made  with  four  animals  fed 
a  total  ration  of  15.4  pounds  of  oats.  11  pounds  of  alfalfa  hay.  and 
11  pounds  of  wheat  straw.  Molasses  was  gradually  substituted  for 
part  of  the  oats,  until  13.2  pounds  of  the  latter  and  2  of  the  former 
were  fed.  The  molasses  was  mixed  with  the  drinking  water.  The 
feeding  was  continued  for  about  six  weeks,  and  all  the  horses  gained 
slightly  in  weight.  The  authors  regard  the  substitution  of  molasses 
for  part  of  the  oats  as  entirely  satisfactory,  since  it  was  readily  eaten 
and  the  vigor  and  weight  of  the  horses  were  maintained. 

Grandeau  h  has  very  recently  deseribed  a  number  of  practical  tests 
in  which  molasses  mixtures  were  added  to  the  rations  of  horses.  The 
cost  of  the  ration  was  diminished  and  the  health  and  condition  of  the 
animals  maintained.  Similar  results  have  been  reported  by  other 
investigators  in  France  and  by  Wibbens*  in  Holland.  From  all  these 
investigations  it  seems  fair  to  conclude  that  molasses  can  be  safely 
fed  to  horses  when  its  cost  in  comparison  with  other  feeding  stuffs 
warrants  its  use.  Apart  from  the  nutritive  material  it  supplies,  it  has 
a  value  as  an  appetizer  and  frequently  renders  poor  hay  or  other  feed 
more  palatable. 

The  feeding  value  of  blood  molasses  (a  mixed  feed  containing  dried 
blood  and  beet-sugar  molasses)  was  studied  in  Denmark-  with  23 
horses  belonging  to  a  Copenhagen  milk  company.  The  horses  were 
divided  into  two  lots.     One  lot  was  fed  a  ration  of  barle}'  and  oats  1 :2 

a  Ann.  Agron.,  24  (1898),  p.  353. 

&  Jour.  Agr.  Prat.,  n.  ser.,  4  (1902),  pp.  569.  o9\),  697. 

cCnltora,  14  (1902),  p.  520. 

dLandinandsblade,  32  (1899),  p.  349. 


31 

during  part  of  the  test,  and  later  of  oats  and  ha\ r.  Lot  2  was  fed 
the  same  ration  except  thai  blood  molasses  was  substituted  for  part  of 
the  grain  in  the  ratio  of  1  pound  to  2  pounds;  2.5  pounds  to  3  pounds, 

and,  later,  of  -J  pounds  to  1  pounds.  This  latter  ratio  represents  about 
what  was  considered  the  comparative  value  of  the  molasses  feed.  In 
earlier  Scandinavian  experiments0  the  successful  feeding  of  2.w2  pounds 
of  beet-sugar  molasses  per  head  daily  to  work  horses  was  observed; 
other  similar  tests  might  be  cited. 

FKUITS,  FRESH  AND  DRIED. 

Although  horses  are  often  given  apples  as  they  are  given  lumps  of 
sugar,  fruit  is  not  generally  thought  of  as  a  feeding  stuff,  yet  its  use 
for  this  purpose  is  by  no  means  novel.  The  Arabs,  according  to  K. 
Daumas,*  commonly  feed  their  horses  fresh  dates.  In  such  dates  the 
pits  are  soft  and  are  eaten  with  the  pulp.  Sometimes  3  or  -4  pounds 
of  fresh  dates  are  mixed  with  water  to  a  sort  of  mush  before  feeding. 
It  is  believed  that  dates  are  fattening,  but  that  they  do  not  produce 
muscle. 

In  California  and  possibly  in  other  regions  fruit,  especially  prunes 
and  other  dried  fruit,  is  sometimes  fed  when  the  market  is  overstocked 
or  when  for  some  other  reason  it  can  not  be  profitably  sold.  Accord- 
ing to  a  recent  statement/'  small  prunes  of  low  market  value  have 
been  successfully  fed  to  horses  for  a  long  period.  It  is  stated  that 
the  horses  eat  them  with  relish.  The  pits  should  be  crushed  before 
feeding. 

The  California  Station d  has  reported  analyses  of  a  number  of  fresh 
and  dried  fruits  and  discussed  their  value  as  stock  feed.  A  recent 
report  of  the  Arizona  Station e  gives  the  composition  of  almond  hulls 
or  pericarps,  the  portion  of  the  almond  removed  before  the  nut  is 
marketed,  and  states  that  this  material  has  been  found  to  be  a  fatten- 
ing feed  for  horses. 

All  common  fruits  when  fresh  are  very  succulent,  containing  on  an 
average  ^0  to  90  per  cent  water,  the  nutritive  material  consisting 
almost  entirely  of  carbohydrates.  When  dried — i.  e.,  concentrated 
by  evaporation — they  are  much  more  nutritious.  Raisins,  prunes, 
dried  peaches,  etc.,  contain  about  25  per  cent  water  and  about  TO  per 
cent  carbohydrates,  of  which  a  considerable  part  is  sugar.  The  value 
of  sugar  as  a  nutrient  is  recognized,  and  it  is  not  surprising,  therefore, 
that  fruits,  especially  after  drying,  should  have  a  considerable  feed- 
ing value. 

«K.  Landt  Akad.  Handl.  Ti.lskr.,  34  (1895),  p.  24(3. 

&Les  Chevaux  du  Sahara.     Paris:  Calmann  Levy,  1887,  p.  134. 

c  Pacific  Rural  Press,  60  (1900),  p.  402. 

^  California  Station  Bui.  132. 

^Arizona  Station  Rpt.  1902,  p.  269. 


82 

INJURIOUS  FEEDING  STUFFS. 

In  feeding  horses  precautions  should  always  be  taken  to  avoid  mate- 
rials harmful  in  themselves,  or  those  which  have  become  harmful. 
Dirt,  small  stones,  etc.,  should  be  removed  from  grain  by  proper 
screening,  and  all  feeding  stuffs  should  be  clean.  On  this  subject 
Lavalard"  says: 

Some  of  our  recent  experiments  have  had  to  do  with  the  methods  of  feeding.  They 
cover  a  number  of  points.  The  first  and  perhaps  the  most  important  is  the  advantage 
of  cleaning  the  grain.  Grandeau  showed  in  his  experiments  that  oats  could  be  sat- 
isfactorily freed  of  foreign  grains  and  impurities  by  some  of  the  well-known  screen- 
ing devices.  He  studied  the  composition  of  the  impurities,  and  found  that  some  of 
them  were  injurious  to  the  health  of  the  horses. 

The  importance  of  proper  cleaning  is  illustrated  by  a  point  in  our  own  experience. 
A  few  years  ago,  after  a  very  severe  drought,  we  were  compelled  to  feed  oats  containing 
tares  and  leguminous  seeds,  some  of  which  were  those  of  the  species  of  Lathyrus. 
Symptoms  of  Lathyrus  poisoning  were  noted  in  a  number  of  horses.  The  attacks 
were  frequently  severe  and  sometimes  fatal.  When  oats  were  properly  cleaned  this 
trouble  was  entirely  obviated.  Cleaning  also  increases  the  density  of  the  oats  by 
removing  mineral  matter  and  dust,  which  may  sometimes  induce  attacks  of  intestinal 
obstruction,  colic,  etc. 

There  are  a  number  of  plants  which  are  poisonous  to  horses  when 
eaten  in  any  considerable  amount.  The  loco  plants,  mostly  species  of 
Astragalus,  are  ordinarily  regarded  as  of  this  class.  These  plants  have 
been  studied  by  the  Colorado,  Kansas,  South  Dakota,  Montana,  and 
Oklahoma  stations  among  others,  and  by  this  Department,  but  the 
results  obtained  are  not  entirely  conclusive.  The  poisonous  properties 
of  rattlebox  ( Crotalaria  sagittalis)  were  demonstrated  b}^  the  South 
Dakota  Station,  and  those  of  some  lupines  by  the  Montana  Station. 
According  to  recent  experiments  at  the  Vermont  Station b  the  common 
horsetail  (Equisetum  arvense)  may  cause  poisoning  when  present  in  hay. 
It  was  found  that  when  horses  were  fed  cured  horsetail  equal  in  amount 
to  not  more  than  one-fourth  of  their  coarse  fodder  ration,  symptoms 
of  poisoning  were  noticed,  and  if  the  feeding  was  continued  the  horses 
died.  The  symptoms  of  poisoning  were  less  noticeable  with  \Toung 
than  with  old  horses,  and  also  when  a  liberal  grain  ration  was  supplied. 
It  was  also  observed  that  the  green  plant  was  less  harmful  than  the 
dry,  possibly  owing  to  the  fact  that  green  fodder  is  somewhat  laxative. 

Eeeds  which  are  ordinarily  wholesome  may  under  certain  conditions 
be  harmful.  Thus  there  is  a  widespread  and  apparently  justifiable 
prejudice  against  moldy  or  decomposing  feeding  stuffs.  Experi- 
ments carried  on  at  the  Kansas  and  Indiana  stations  showed  that  the 
continued  feeding  of  moldy  corn  induced  intestinal  and  nervous  dis- 
orders of  a  serious  nature.  It  is  a  matter  of  common  observation  that 
food  which  has  been  wet  will  ferment  or  sour  readily  and  cause  intes- 
tinal disorders.     This  has  to  be  guarded  against  especially  in  warm 

"Loc.  cit. 

&  Vermont  Station  Bui.  96. 


33 

climates.  Plants  which  are  ordinarily  wholesome  may  become  harmful 
if  infested  with  ergot.     The  effect  of  ergot  on  horses  has  been  studied 

by  the  Iowa.  Kansas,  and  Montana  stations  and  others.  It  la  gener- 
ally conceded  that  the  presence  of  ergol  is  a  cause  of  rheumatism. 
Some  \'v(h[*  which  are  regarded  as  wholesome  when  properly  fed  may 
sometimes  prove  injurious  if  fed  for  a  long  time,  or  in  improper 
quantities.  Thus,  millet  hay,  in  many  sections  of  the  Western  Dinted 
States,  is  believed  to  cause  the  so-called  millet  disease  of  horses.  This 
question  was  studied  by  the  North  Dakota  Station/'  It  was  found 
that  long-continued  feeding  of  millet  hay  caused  lameness  and  other 
symptoms  of  poisoning.  From  the  experiments  and  observations  the 
conclusion  was  drawn  that  feeding  millet  alone  as  a  coarse  fodder  is 
injurious  to  horses,  since  it  produces  an  increased  action  of  the  kid- 
neys and  causes  lameness  and  swelling  of  the  joints  and  an  infusion 
of  blood  into  the  joints.  It  may  also  injure  the  texture  of  the  bones, 
rendering  them  soft  and  less  tenacious.  The  bad  effects  due  to  long- 
continued  feeding  of  millet  were  observed  whether  the  crop  was  cut  just 
when  the  heads  were  fully  ripe  or  earlier,  although  there  is  a  popular 
belief  that  the  trouble  is  due  to  harvesting  the  crop  before  the  heads 
are  fully  ripe.  The  investigation  seemed  to  show  conclusively  that 
feeding  millet  produced  millet  disease,  but  the  specific  cause  tb  which 
the  dangerous  properties  of  millet  are  due  was  not  learned,  though 
later  work  at  the  station  indicates  that  it  is  a  glucosid. 

An  explanation  of  the  poisoning  of  stock  by  young  sorghum  and 
some  other  forage  plants  is  offered  by  the  discovery  by  Dunstan  and. 
Henry  b  of  a  cyanogenetic  glucosid  in  a  number  of  varieties  of  sorghum 
(Sorghum  vulgar v),  which  under  the  influence  of  a  special  ferment 
present  in  the  plant  liberates  prussic  acid.  It  is  thought  probable  that 
this  acid  may  be  likewise  liberated  in  the  digestive  tract  of  animals 
feeding  on  the  }Toung  plants.  They  did  not  find  the  glucosid  in  the 
mature  sorghum.  For  a  number  of  years  Peters,  Avery,  and  Slade,c 
at  the  Nebraska  Experiment  Station,  have  studied  sorghum  poisoning, 
and  have  recently  demonstrated  the  presence  of  cyanic  acid  in  the 
green  leaves  of  young  and  old  sorghum  plants  and  Kafir  corn. 

METHOD  OF  FEEDING. 

The  method  of  feeding  is  a  subject  which  is  often  discussed,  the 
questions  of  especial  interest  being  the  comparative  merits  of  cooked 
and  raw  feed,  dry  and  soaked  grain,  ground  and  unground  grain,  and 
cut  or  chaffed  and  uncut  coarse  fodder.  The  number  of  experiments 
which  have  to  do  with  these  topics  is  not  numerous. 

"  North  Dakota  Station  Buls.  7,  26,  and  35. 
&Proc.  Roy.  Soc.  [London],  70  (1902),  p.  153. 

c Nebraska  Station  Rpt.  1902,  pp.  50,  55;  Jour.  Comp.  Med.  and  Vet.  Arch.,  23 
(1902),  p.  704;  Jour.  Amer.  Chem.  Soc.,  25  (1903),  No.  1,  p.  55. 

17399— No.  125—03—3 


34 

COOKED  AND  RAW  FEED. 

Boussingault  compared  oats  and  an  equal  volume  of  rye  boiled  until 
the  grain  burst.  The  results  were  not  favorable  to  cooking  the  feed. 
According  to  another  of  his  tests  30.8  pounds  of  mashed  steam  pota- 
toes could  not  replace  11  pounds  of  hay.  The  potatoes  were  mixed 
with  cut  straw  and  fed  cold. 

It  is  often  claimed  that  cooking  feed  increases  its  palatabilit}T  and 
digestibility.  The  general  conclusion  drawn  from  tests  with  farm 
animals  is  that  this  belief  is  not  warranted  and  that  the  cost  of  cooking 
is  not  made  up  for  by  the  increased  value  of  the  ration.  Prof.  W.  A. 
Henry"  states  that  boiled  feed  is  useful  for  colts,  brood  mares,  and 
stallions  if  fed  two  or  three  times  per  week,  and  that  draft  horses 
which  are  being  prepared  for  sale  or  for  exhibition  may  be  given 
cooked  feed  once  a  day.  In  his  opinion  an  excellent  feed  for  horses 
is  made  by  boiling  barley  and  oats  in  a  kettle  with  considerable  water 
and  pouring  the  mass  over  chaffed  hay,  allowing  the  whole  to  stand 
until  the  hay  is  well  softened.  Bran,  roots,  and  a  small  quantity  of  oil 
meal  ma}'  be  added  also. 

DRY  AND  SOAKED  FEED. 

It  is  often  said  that  soaking  feed,  especially  hard  grain,  renders  it 
more  easily  masticated  and  improves  its  digestibility.  It  is  doubtful 
if  the  matter  is  as  important  with  horses  as  some  other  classes  of  farm 
animals.  According  to  Wolff6  healthy  horses  with  good  teeth  digested 
dry  beans  and  corn  as  well  as  the  same  materials  which  had  been  soaked 
in  water  for  24  hours. 

Soaking  or  wetting  feed  may  sometimes  be  of  importance  as  regards 
the  health  of  horses.  According  to  the  experience  of  an  English 
feeder c  chaffed  straw,  which  was  fed  on  account  of  a  shortage  in  the 
hay  crop,  gave  better  results  when  soaked  than  when  dry.  The  dry 
material  caused  colic  and  constipation.  It  was  also  observed  that  the 
horses  relished  soaked  grain  (corn  and  oats  1:1). 

It  is  believed  that  the  dust  in  hay  causes  heaves,  and  to  avoid  such 
trouble  both  long  and  cut  hay,  especiall\T  clover,  is  very  often  damp- 
ened before  feeding  to  lay  the  dust. 

GROUND  AND  UNGROUND  FEED. 

Opinions  differ  as  regards  the  advantages  of  grinding  grain.  In 
Professor  Henry's"  opinion,  for  horses  which  are  out  of  the  stable 
during  the  day  and  worked  hard,  all  grains,  with  the  possible  excep- 
tion of  oats,  should  be  ground,  and  for  those  at  extremely  hard  work, 
all  grain  should  be  ground  and  mixed  with  chaffed  hay.     For  idle 

«Loc.  cit.  "Live  Stock  Jour.,  39  (1894),  p.  30. 

&  See  footnote,  p.  60. 


85 

horses,  oats  or  grain  should  noi   be  ground,  nor  should  bay  or  straw 
be  chaffed.     In  other  words,  provided  the  animals  have  time  to  masti 
cute  their  ration  thoroughly,  grinding  i>  not  necessary.     Wheo  this 

is  not  the  case,  grinding  takes  the  place  of  thorough  mastication  to 
some  extent  and  increases  the  assimilation  of  the  ration. 

When  whole  oats  were  compared  with  ground  wheat  and  bran  by 
Sheppcrd"  at  the  North  Dakota  Station  the  horses  fed  the  former 
ration  ate  somewhat  more,  and  showed  a  slight  loss  in  weight,  while 
doing  a  little  less  work  than  those  fed  the  ground  grain. 

In  a  test  of  the  comparative  merits  of  timothy  hay  and  corn  and 
clover,  oats,  and  wheat  made  with  two  lots  of  work  horses  at  the  Utah 
Station6  the  grains  were  fed  unground  for  somewhat  more  than  one- 
half  of  the  experimental  period  and  ground  during  the  remainder  of 
the  period.  The  ground  and  unground  grains  were  regarded  as  equally 
satisfactory. 

At  the  Iowa  Station  Wilson  and  Curtissc  compared  whole  and  ground 
grains  (oats,  corn,  and  barley)  for  colts,  and  found  that  somewhat 
larger  gains  were  made  on  the  ground  feed. 

In  the  study  of  the  digestibility  of  the  different  feeding  stuffs  car- 
ried on  at  the  Maryland  Experiment  Station  Patterson d  compared  a 
number  of  whole  and  ground  feeds.  His  results  show  that  ground 
oats  and  corn  were  more  thoroughly  digested  than  the  unground  grain. 
In  this  connection  it  should  be  noted  that  similar  results  have  been 
obtained  in  tests  with  other  farm  animals,  but  it  is  commonly  believed 
that  the  difference  in  digestibility  is  often  not  sufficient  to  pay  for  the 
additional  cost  of  grinding. 

From  the  American  tests  and  those  which  have  been  made  in 
Europe  it  appears  fair  to  say  that  there  is  no  very  marked  advantage 
in  grinding  grain  for  health}7  horses  with  good  teeth.     Lavalard  says: 

Contrary  to  the  opinion  of  some  experts,  the  writer  believes  it  is  not  necessary  to 
grind  grain  for  horses.  This  is  especially  true  in  the  case  of  oats.  In  some  of  our 
earlier  experiments,  where  ground  grain  was  fed,  it  was  noticed  after  a  few  months 
that  the  horses  preferred  to  crush  it  themselves.  Of  course  this  does  not  refer  to  old 
horses  [i.  e.,  horses  having  poor  teeth].     They  can  be  fed  ground  grain  to  advantage. 

CUT  AND  UNCUT  COARSE  FODDER. 

It  is  perhaps  the  general  opinion  that  when  horses  have  ample  time 
for  chewing  and  digesting  their  feed  there  is  no  necessity  for  chaffing 
or  cutting  hay  and  straw.  When  the  time  for  feeding  is  limited 
chaffing  and  cutting  coarse  fodder  is  regarded  as  advantageous.  This 
is  an  item  of  special  importance  with  hard-worked  horses  kept  in  the 
stable  only  at  night.  Furthermore,  chaffed  feed  occupies  less  space 
for  storage  than  uncut   hay  or  straw  and   can   be  readily  handled. 

«  North  Dakota  Station  Bui.  20.  'Iowa  Station  Bui.  18,  p.  470. 

&Utah  Station  Bui.  30.  ''Maryland  Station  Bui.  51. 


36 

Shredding  corn  fodder  is  regarded  a>  an  economical  practice,  but 
apparently  few  experiments  on  the  comparative  merits  of  shredded 
and  whole  corn  fodder  for  horses  have  vet  been  reported.  No  marked 
variation  was  observed  in  the  weights  of  two  lots  of  horses  fed  whole 
and  cut  timothy  or  whole  and  cut  alfalfa  and  clover  hay  mixed  in  a 
test  carried  on  at  the  Utah  Station/' 

At  the  Maryland  Station  Patterson,6  who  studied  the  digestibility 
of  a  number  of  whole  and  ground  feeds,  found  that  grinding  corn 
shives — i.  e..  cornstalks  from  which  the  blades,  husks,  and  pith  are 
removed — until  the  material  resembled  coarse  bran  did  not  destroy  its 
value  as  a  coarse  fodder  and  that  the  finely  ground  material  supplied 
the  necessary  bulk  to  the  ration  as  well  as  the  same  material  unground. 
It  was  further  claimed  that  the  finely  ground  coarse  fodder  possessed 
an  advantage  over  the  unground  material  in  that  it  could  be  mixed 
with  grain  to  form  a  well-balanced  ration  and  fed  to  horses  on  ship- 
board, or  under  similar  conditions,  more  readily  than  unground  fodder 
and  grain. 

COST  OF  A  RATION. 

The  cost  of  a  ration  made  up  of  the  ordinary  grains  and  coarse 
fodders  has  been  investigated  by  at  least  three  of  the  American  experi- 
ment stations.  The  Massachusetts  Hatch  Station0  recorded  the  kinds 
and  amounts  of  foods  consumed  by  three  farm  horses  for  five  years, 
with  a  view  to  learning  the  average  cost  of  the  daily  feed.  In  the 
different  years  the  cost  of  the  ration,  which  consisted  of  hay,  corn,  oats, 
and  other  common  feeding  stuffs,  varied  from  18.5  to  2-i.8  cents  per 
head  daily. 

At  the  Oklahoma  Station  '■  statistics  of  the  cost  of  feed  of  work 
horses  were  also  recorded  in  tests  of  the  comparative  value  of  Kafir 
corn  and  maize.  Red  Kafir  corn  and  maize  at  20  cents  per  bushel, 
oats  at  25  cents  per  bushel,  and  bran  at  25  cents  per  hundredweight 
were  used.  The  average  cost  per  horse  of  a  day's  labor  was  estimated 
to  be  IT  cents. 

Using  mixed-grain  rations,  according  to  the  New  Hampshire  Sta- 
tion/ the  average  cost  of  feed  per  horse  per  year  was  *7-±.32.  The 
average  cost  for  feed  per  hour's  work  performed  during  the  two  years 
covered  by  the  test  was  3 A  cents. 

The  data  recorded  above  are  too  limited  for  general  deduction. 

FATTENING  HORSES  FOR  MARKET. 

Fattening  horses  so  that  they  will  reach  market  in  good  condition 
for  sale  is  quite  an  important  industry  in  some  regions.  For  instance. 
in  Iowa  there  are  a  number  of  feeders  who  thus  prepare  large  num- 

'  Utah  Station  Bui.  13.  ^  Oklahoma  Station  Bpt  1899,  p.  31. 

^  Maryland  Station  Bui.  51.  '  New  Hampshire  Station  Bui.  82. 

•Massachusetts  Hatch  Station  Rpt.  1893,  p.  179. 


37 

bers  of  horses  for  the  Chicago  market.  Though  few,  if  any,  experi- 
ments have  been  carried  on  at  the  stations  to  show  the  feed  required 
per  pound  of  gain,  the  relative  cost  of  gain,  etc.,  J.  A.  Craig  and 
H.  W.  Brettell."  of  the  Iowa  Station,  have  described  this  industry  on 
t  lie  basis  of  data  gathered  from  local  feeders  extensively  engaged  in  it. 

The  horses  are  usually  purchased  in  the  fall,  after  the  farm  work  is 
over,  and  are  stabled  and  fed  an  abundant  ration,  care  being  taken  to 
accustom  them  gradually  to  full  feed  in  order  to  avoid  colic.  When  on 
full  feed  the  horses  studied  were  given,  per  head,  10  to  14  ears  of  coin 
in  the  morning,  at  noon,  and  again  at  night,  with  3  quarts  of  oats  and 
bran  1:2  and  hay  ad  libitum  in  the  middle  of  the  forenoon  and  also  in 
the  middle  of  the  afternoon.  Recognizing  the  importance  of  a  long 
period  of  rest,  no  feed  was  given  from  0  or  7  at  night  until  5  o'clock 
in  the  morning.  The  horses  were  watered  twice  a  day  and  were  given 
all  the}T  would  drink.  On  account  of  the  large  number  fed,  the  horses 
could  not  be  exercised,  but  as  a  rule  were  kept  idle  in  the  stable  until 
a  few  days  before  they  were  marketed.  To  insure  good  condition  it 
was  found  advantageous  to  give  0.5-0.75  pint  Glauber  salts  per  head 
twice  a  week.  Oil  meal,  it  is  stated,  may  also  be  given  to  good  advan- 
tage, as  it  aids  greatly  in  putting  on  flesh  and  also  makes  the  skin  soft. 

The  importance  of  keeping  mangers  and  feed  boxes  clean  is  insisted 
upon,  and  attention  is  especially  directed  to  the  need  of  examining  the 
horses'  teeth  and  removing  with  a  float  any  sharp  points  which  would 
make  the  gums  sore  and  thus  prevent  the  horses  from  masticating  their 
feed  properly. 

With  such  feeding  and  care  satisfactory  gains  were  generally  real- 
ized. In  one  instance,  it  is  stated,  a  horse  fed  in  this  manner  made  a 
gain  of  5.5  pounds  per  day  for  a  period  of  fifty  days,  or  550  pounds  in 
one  hundred  da}^s.  In  several  instances,  with  as  many  as  a  do/en 
horses,  a  gain  of  3.75  pounds  per  head  per  day  was  obtained  through- 
out a  period  of  ninety  days. 

WATERING  HORSES. 

A  discussion  of  the  subject  of  watering  horses  should  take  into 
account  the  reasons  why  water  is  needed,  the  amounts  required, 
the  proper  time  for  watering,  and  related  topics. 

Horses,  like  other  animals,  require  water  to  moisten  their  food  so 
that  the  digestive  juices  may  permeate  it  readily,  to  dilute  the  blood 
and  other  fluids  of  the  body,  and  for  other  physiological  uses.  It 
may  be  assumed  that  under  any  given  normal  condition  the  body  con- 
tains a  definite  amount  of  water.  When  any  considerable  amount 
of  water  is  lost  from  the  body,  a  sensation  of  thirst  is  experienced, 
showing  that  more  water  is  needed  to  take  its  place.     Practically  all 

"Breeders'  Gaz.,  35  (1899),  p.  781. 


38 

the  water  excreted  leaves  the  body  in  the  feces,  urine,  perspiration, 
and   breath.     The  amount  eliminated   in  each,  according  to  Wolff,a 

increases  with  the  amount  of  water  consumed,  the  largest  amount 
being  excreted  in  the  feces.  In  experiments  which  he  carried  on.  the 
total  amount  of  water  consumed  ranged  from  L7.363  kilogram-  to 
34.272  kilograms  (38.3  to  75.6  pounds).  The  feces  contained  from 
4o.3  to  47. 3  per  cent  of  the  total  amount  excreted;  the  urine  from 
21.2  to  34.1*  per  cent. 

In  addition  to  the  water  drunk  by  horses,  a  considerable  amount  is 
obtained  in  the  more  or  less  succulent  food  eaten.  The  amount  of 
water  required  is  influenced  by  a  number  of  factors,  including  the 
season  of  the  year,  temperature  of  the  surrounding  air,  character  of 
the  feed,  the  individual  peculiarities  of  the  horse,  the  amount  and 
character  of  the  work  performed,  and  probably  others.  The  amount 
of  water  needed  increases  with  the  temperature  and  with  the  amount 
of  work  performed,  since  it  is  very  evident  that  both  of  these  factors 
increase  the  amount  which  is  given  off  from  the  body  in  the  form  of 
perspiration.  Muscular  work  also  increases  the  amount  of  water 
vapor  excreted  in  the  breath.  According  to  Grandeau  and  Leclerc/-' 
a  horse  used  in  one  of  their  experiments,  when  at  rest,  evaporated  6.4 
pounds  of  water  per  day;  when  walking.  <S.6  pounds;  when  walking 
and  drawing  a  load.  12.7  pounds;  when  trotting,  13.4  pounds,  and 
when  trotting  and  drawing  a  load.  20.6  pounds.  It  is  evident  from 
these  figures  that  the  amount  of  water  excreted,  and  hence  the  amount 
required,  varies  with  the  work  performed. 

It  has  been  found  that  less  water  is  required  when  the  ration  con- 
sists largely  of  concentrated  feed  than  when  large  amounts  of  coarse 
fodder  are  consumed,  and  it  is  a  matter  of  common  observation  that 
less  water  is  consumed  when  green,  succulent  feeds  form  a  consider- 
able part  of  the  ration  than  when  it  consists  of  dry  feed.  That  the 
amount  of  water  taken,  even  in  dry  feed,  may  be  considerable  is  shown 
by  the  fact  that  a  ration  of  12.1  pounds  oats  and  15.4  pounds  hay, 
according  to  Wolff's0  calculation,  furnishes  some  4.1  pounds  water. 
A  succulent  ration  would  furnish  much  more.  In  Grandeau  and 
Leclere's  experiments  with  the  Paris  Cab  Company's  horses  it  was 
found  that  with  a  mixed  ration  the  average  proportion  of  water  drunk 
to  dry  matter  supplied  was  2.1:1  when  the  horses  were  at  rest,  and 
3.6:1  when  they  were  used  for  cab  work.  In  some  of  Wolff's  experi- 
ments the  proportions  varied  from  2.35:1  to  3.5:1.  The  effect  of  the 
amount  of  work  performed  and  of  individual  peculiarities  on  the 
amount  of  water  required  is  illustrated  by  the  following  figures 
obtained  by  Grandeau  and  Leclerc:  Two  horses  consumed  respectively 
24.9  and  30.7  pounds  of  water  per  day  when  their  work  consisted  only 

«Landw.  .Tahrb..  1887,  Sup.  3. 
&A1111.  Sci.  Agron.,  1888,  II.  p.  276. 


39 

of  walking;  when  the  horses  walked  and  in  addition  drew  a  load,  tin* 
amounts  of  water  consumed  were  28.9  and  35.4  pounds;  when  trotting 
without  a  load,  31.3  and  27:6  pounds,  and  when  trotting  and  drawing 

a  load,  f>2  and  50.7  pounds,  respectively. 

In  a  number  of  feeding  experiments  carried  on  with  horses  at  the 
experiment  stations  in  the  United  States  the  amount  of  water  con- 
sumed has  been  recorded.  In  tests  at  the  New  Hampshire  Station."  in 
which  the  ration  consisted  of  different  grain  mixtures,  with  timothy 
hay  and  corn  fodder,  it  was  found  that  the  quantity  of  water  con- 
sumed varied  from  70.94  pounds  to  lM)A  pounds  per  horse  per  day.  It 
was  observed  that  both  the  ration  consumed  and  the  amount  of  work 
performed  influenced  the  quantity  of  water  drunk,  although  the  indi- 
viduality of  the  horse  had  the  most  marked  effect. 

The  amount  of  water  consumed  by  horses  on  rations  of  timothy  hay 
and  alfalfa  hay  (with  oats)  was  studied  at  the  Utah  Station.^  It  was 
found  that  on  an  average  larger  amounts  were  consumed  with  the  lat- 
ter than  with  the  former,  the  average  amounts  per  day  being  some 
78.51  and  88.85  pounds,  respectively.  The  greater  consumption  of 
water  on  the  alfalfa  ration  induced  a  greater  elimination  by  the  kid- 
neys, but  so  far  as  could  be  observed  this  was  not  attended  by  any  bad 
results  nor  was  it  found  inconvenient. 

At  the  Oklahoma  Station  c  a  pair  of  mules,  during  hot  summer 
weather,  drank  113  pounds  of  water  per  head  daily,  and  on  one  daj^  the 
pair  drank  350  pounds.  On  an  average  a  pair  of  mules  and  horses, 
each  weighing  2,130  pounds,  drank  107  pounds  of  -water  per  head  per 
day  while  at  moderate  work.  In  these  tests  the  grain  ration  consisted 
of  Kafir  corn,  maize,  oats,  and  bran. 

The  proper  time  to  water  horses  is  a  matter  concerning  which 
opinions  differ.  Many  feeders  believe  that  they  should  be  watered 
before  feeding,  while  others  are  equally  certain  that  feeding  should 
precede  watering.  Experiments  made  on  this  subject  at  the  Utah 
Station  did  not  lead  to  definite  conclusions. 

The  subject  was  recently  investigated  by  Tangl d  at  Budapest.  The 
rations  fed  consisted  of  different  mixtures  of  corn,  oats,  hay.  and  straw, 
and  a  number  of  experiments  were  made  in  which  the  only  condition 
which  varied  was  the  time  of  watering.  In  some  of  the  tests  the 
horses  drank  before  and  in  some  after  eating,  and  in  others  after  the 
grain  portion  of  the  ration  was  eaten  but  before  the  hay. 

Regarding  these  experiments  Professor  Tangl  makes  in  effect  the 
following  statement:  So  far  as  wras  observed  the  time  of  drinking  had 

a  New  Hampshire  Station  Bui.  82. 
6  Utah  Station  Bui.  77. 
^Oklahoma  Station  Rpt.  1899,  p.  31. 

dLandw.  Vers.  Stat.,  57  (1902),  p.  329;  Twentieth  Century  Farmer,  1892,  No. 
82,  p.  1. 


40 

DO  cH'oct  on  the  digestibility  of  a  ration  of  grain  and  hay.  When  hay 
only  was  fed  there  seemed  to  be  a  slight  advantage  in  watering  before 
feeding.  In  general,  horses  may  he  watered  before,  during,  or  after 
meals  without  interfering  with  the  digestion  and  absorption  of  food. 
All  these  methods  of  watering  are  equallvgood  for  the  horse,  and  each 
of  them  limy  be  employed,  according  to  circumstances.  It  is  obvious 
that  certain  circumstances  may  make  it  necessary  to  adopt  one  or  other 
method.  For  instance,  after  severe  loss  of  water,  such  as  occurs  in 
consequence  of  long-continued,  severe  exertion,  the  animal  should 
always  be  allowed  to  drink  before  he  is  fed,  as  otherwise  he  will  not 
feed  well.  Although  all  methods  of  watering  are  equally  good  for  the 
horse,  it  is  not  desirable  to  change  unnecessarily  from  one  method  to 
another.  Animals,  or  at  least  some  of  them,  appear  to  be  not  altogether 
indifferent  to  uch  a  change.  In  the  experiments  referred  to  above  it 
was  found  that  whenever  a  change  was  made  from  the  plan  of  water- 
ing after  feeding  to  that  of  watering  before,  the  appetite  fell  off  for 
some  days;  not  that  the  horses  did  not  consume  the  whole  of  the  food 
given  to  them,  but  for  some  days  together  they  did  not  eat  with  the 
same  avidity  as  before,  and  took  a  longer  time  to  consume  their  rations 
completely.  A  similar  effect  was  not  observed  when  the  change  was 
from  watering  before  to  watering  after  feeding,  or  from  watering 
after  to  watering  during  meals,  or  when  the  change  was  in  the  oppo- 
site direction  to  the  last.  It  is  possible  that  the  method  of  watering 
before  feeding,  until  the  animal  has  become  accustomed  to  it,  produces 
a  certain  feeling  of  satiety.  The  time  of  drinking  exercised  a  marked 
effect  on  the  amount  of  water  consumed  and  upon  the  amount  of  water 
excreted.  The  horses  drank  the  greatest  amount  of  water  when  it 
was  given  after  feeding  and  the  least  when  it  was  supplied  before 
feeding.  This  was  especially  noticeable  in  the  morning  when  water 
was  sometimes  refused  if  offered  before  feeding.  The  excretion  of 
urine  was  directly  proportional  to  the  amount  of  water  consumed. 
When  it  is  desired  to  increase  the  excretion,  the  author  recommends 
watering  after  feeding.  The  method  of  watering  had  no  effect  upon 
the  amount  or  qualitative  composition  of  the  feces.  Body  weight 
varied  with  the  amount  of  water  consumed. 

DIGESTIBILITY  OF  FEEDING  STUFFS. 

In  the  preceding  pages  reference  has  been  made  to  the  composition 
of  different  feeding  stuffs  and  to  the  tests  of  the  comparative  value  of 
different  concentrated  feeds  and  coarse  fodders.  The  real  value  of  any 
feeding  stuff  is  determined,  not  alone  by  its  composition,  but  also  by 
its  digestibility;  that  is,  by  the  amount  of  material  which  it  gives  up 
to  the  body  in  its  passage  through  the  digestive  tract.  It  is  evident 
that  if  two  feeding  stuffs  have  practically  the  same  composition,  but 


41 

one  gives  up  more  materia,  to  the  body  than  the  other,  thai  Is,  is  more 
thoroughly  digested,  it  must  actually  be  more  valuable  than  the  other 
material.     The  bulk  of  the  Bubstance  of  almost  all  feeding  stuffs  is 

insoluble  when  eaten.  Only  material  in  solution  can  pass  through  the 
walls  of  the  stomach  and  intestines  into  the  circulation  and  be  utilized 
by  the  body,  therefore  digestibility  consists  chiefly  in  rendering  insol- 
uble materials  soluble.  This  is  effected  by  the  aid  of  digestive  fer- 
ments and  also  by  bacteria. 

Digestion  experiments  are  frequently  made  to  learn  how  thoroughly 
a  given  feeding  stuff  or  ration  is  assimilated.  The  usual  method  is  to 
feed  the  material  under  consideration  for  a  longer  or  shorter  time,  the 
amount  and  composition  being  determined.  From  the  total  nutrients 
consumed,  the  amount  excreted  and  undigested  in  the  feces  is  deducted, 
showing  the  amount  of  each  retained  in  the  body.  It  is  the  usual  cus- 
tom to  express  the  amounts  digested  in  percentages,  the  results  thus 
obtained  being  termed  coefficients  of  digestibility. 

The  digestibility  of  a  number  of  different  feeding  stuffs  has  been 
tested  with  horses  in  this  country  and  in  Europe,  although  the  number 
of  such  experiments  is  much  smaller  than  in  the  case  of  cattle  and 
sheep.  The  most  extended  series  of  American  experiments  with 
horses  was  carried  on  by  Patterson0  at  the  Maryland  Experiment 
Station.  In  the  table  below  the  American  and  foreign  digestion 
experiments  with  horses  are  summarized.  In  a  few  cases  values 
obtained  with  ruminants  are  also  included  in  the  table,  since  no  coef- 
ficients of  digestibility,  obtained  with  horses,  w^ere  available,  and  the 
data  were  needed  in  computing  the  value  of  rations  discussed  later 
(p.  48). 

Table  2. — Summary  of  coefficients  of  digestibility  obtained  in  experiments  with  horses. 


Kinds  of  fodder. 


Alfalfa,  uncured 

Alfalfa  hay 

Alfalfa  (hay)  stalks 

Alfalfa  (hay)  leaves 

Red  clover  hay 

Meadow  hay,  best  quality 

Meadow  hay,  medium  quality. 
Meadow  hay,  poor  quality. . .". . 

Meadow  hay,  average 

Timothy  hay 

Corn  stover  b 

Ground  corn  shi ves 

Wheat  straw 

Spelt  straw 

Corn  silage  c 

Carrots 

Potatoes 

Shelled  corn 


Coefficients  of  digestibility, 


Protein. 


Per 


cent. 
78.2 
74.6 
72.6 
75.5 
55.7 
63.5 
57.5 
54.6 
57.1 
21.2 
64.1 
67.5 
27.7 
22.9 
49.3 
99.3 
88.0 
57.8 


Xitrogen- 

Fat. 

free 

extract. 

Per  cent. 

Per  cent. 

81.0  i 
70.2 

19.1 

63.9 

76.6 
63.5 

28.7 

22.0 

65.5 

18.0 

58.1 

23.6 

52.2 

20.7 

56.7 

47.3 

47.3 

73.6 

68.2 

59.8 

47.0 

65.7 

28.1 

20.2 

17.9 

80.0 

68.6 

93.8 

99.4 

47.7 

88.2 

a  Maryland  Station  Bui.  51. 

b  Coefficients  of  digestibility  of  corn  fodder  as  fed  to  ruminants. 

c  Coefficients  of  digestibility  as  fed  to  ruminants. 


fiber. 


Per  cent. 
46.8 
39.0 
-  40.3 
62.1 
37.4 
48.2 
39.0 
37.6 
39.7 
42.  6 
73.  8 
64.6 
17.7 
30.0 


9.1 


42 


Table  2. — Summary  of  coefficients  of  digestibility  obtained  in  experiments  with 

horses — Continued. 


Com  meal 

Oats 

Ground  oats 

Wheuta 

Rye 

Cotton-seed  nival  <•... 

Field  beans 

Lupine  seeds 

Peas 

Wheat  branc 

Wheat  shorts*/ 

Dried  brewers'  grains 

Gluten  meal  c 

Linseed  meal  <■ 

Molasses 


Coefficients  of  digestibility. 

Protein. 

Fat. 

Nitrogen- 
free 
extract. 

Crude 
fiber. 

Per  cent. 

Per  cent. 

Per  cent. 

Per  cent. 

76.0 

67.1 

93.9 

20.2 

79.6 

72.1 

75.8 

29.7 

82.4 

79.9 

86.1 

14.4 

79.6 

72.1 

75.8 

29.7 

80.3 

42.4 

87.3 

b  100.0 

88.4 

93.3 

60.6 

55.5 

85.9 

13.2 

'.'3.  6 

65.4 

94.2 

27.3 

50.8 

60. 8 

83.0 

6.9 

89. 0 

8.0 

77.8 

68.0 

69.4 

28.6 

77.8 

68.0 

69.4 

28.6 

79.3 

91.1 

57.8 

62. 6 

88.2 

91  1 
96.6 

89.  8 
86.1 

85.2 

80.4 

100.0 

100.0 

"As  oats,  no  coefficients  of  digestibility  of  wheat  having  been  found. 

t'This  value  is  without  doubt  much  too  high. 

c  Coefficients  of  digestibility  as  fed  to  ruminants. 

rtAs  bran,  no  coefficients  of  digestibility  of  shorts  having  been  found. 

In  addition  to  the  experiments  reported  above,  a  number  have  been 
found  on  record  which  show  the  digestibility  of  a  mixed  ration,  but, 
generally  speaking,  the  total  number  of  digestion  experiments  with 
horses  is  small  and,  as  will  be  seen,  the  tests  are  limited  to  a  compara- 
tively small  number  of  feeding  stuffs.  Some  36  experiments  were 
found  on  the  digestibility  of  oats  and  30  on  the  digestibility  of  meadow 
hay.  The  total  number  reported  with  alfalfa  hay  was  12,  and  in  all 
other  cases  the  number  was  very  small.  It  is  evident  that  more  diges- 
tion experiments  are  needed  with  some  of  the  common  feeding  stuffs, 
and  that  the  digestibility  of  many  additional  materials  should  be 
studied. 

As  will  be  seen  in  the  majority  of  feeding  stuffs,  the  percentage  of 
protein  digested  is  fairly  high,  greater  in  grains  and  seeds  than  in  ha}T 
and  grasses,  and  least  in  the  case  of  timothy  hay  and  spelt  straw. 
The  high  values  reported  in  the  table  for  protein  of  carrots  and 
molasses  need  some  explanation.  The  percentage  of  protein  in  the 
former  is  comparatively  small,  and  it  is  doubtful  if  the  figures  reported 
show  the  actual  digestibility,  as  it  is  difficult  to  determine  in  the  case 
of  a  nutrient  present  in  small  quantities.  In  the  case  of  molasses,  the 
greater  part  of  the  nitrogenous  material  consists  of  amids  or  other 
nonalbuminoid  bodies.  It  should  be  remembered  that  neither  carrots 
nor  molasses  is  fed  for  protein,  but  rather  for  the  carbohydrates  which 
they  contain. 

Generally  speaking,  the  values  obtained  for  the  digestibility  of  fat 
are  rather  low,  the  fat  of  oats  being  most  digestible  and  that  of  peas 
least  digestible.  In  general  it  has  been  found  that  the  determination 
of  the  coefficients  of  the  digestibility  of  fat  presents  more  difficulty 
than  that  of  other  nutrients. 


43 

It  will  be  seen  that  nitrogen-free  extract  is  quite  thoroughly  assim- 
ilated, the  values  ranging  from  LOO  per  cent  in  tin-  case  of  molasses  to 

1V.'.»  per  cent  in  the  case  of  spelt  straw.  The  high  value  obtained  for 
the  digestibility  of  this  nutrient  in  molasses  is  doubtless  due  to  the 
fact  that  carbohydrates  exist  in  it  in  soluble  forms  and  hence  in  a  con- 
dition very  favorable  for  assimilation.  Possibly  the  comparatively 
small  amount  of  crude  fiber  present  in  carrots  and  potatoes  accounts 
for  the  high  digestibility  of  the  starch  which  makes  up  the  greater 
part  of  the  nitrogen -free  extract  of  the  e  feeds.  The  principal  sources 
of  nitrogen-free  extract  in  the  ration  are  the  cereal  grains  and  their 
by-products,  and  it  is  interesting  to  note  that  the  coefficients  of  digest- 
ibilitv  of  nitrogen-free  extract  of  these  materials  i>  high.  In  the 
majority  of  feeding  stuffs  the  crude  fiber  is  not  very  thoroughly 
digested,  the  coefficients  of  digestibility  being  on  an  average  less  than 
50  per  cent.  The  high  value  given  in  the  above  table  for  the  crude 
fiber  of  rye  is  unusual,  and  should  be  confirmed  by  further  experiments 
before  it  can  be  accepted. 

The  digestibility  of  the  different  materials  wdiich  make  up  the  car- 
bohydrate group  has  been  recently  studied  by  Weiser  and  Zalischek" 
with  horses  and  other  farm  animals.  The  following  table  shows  the 
results  obtained  with  a  horse  fed  different  combinations  of  meadow 
hay.  broom-corn  seed,  and  oats. 

Table  3. — Digestibility  of  (liferent  carbohydrates  by  <i  horse. 


Rations. 


Cellulose 

or  crude 

fiber. 


Starch. 


Pento- 

Undeter- 
mined 
constitu- 
ents. 

Per  cent. 
53.2 

33.8 
49.7 

l'i  r  cent. 
35.8 

34.0 
57.0 

Total  ni- 
trogen- 
free 

extract. 


8.1  pounds  meadow  hay  and  10.8  pounds  broom-     Percent. 

corn  seed 45. 6 

7  pounds  meadow  hay,   6.6   pounds  broom-corn  | 

seed,  and  6.6  pounds  oats 30.5 

S. 3  pounds  meadow  hay  and  7.7  pounds  oats 48.7 


Per  cent. 
84.9 


97.7 
96.7 


Per  cent. 
70.3 


70.9 
72.0 


As  will  be  observed,  the  starch  is  much  more  thoroughly  digested 
than  the  other  carbohydrates.  In  all  the  experiments  the  values 
obtained  for  digestibility  of  the  group,  "  nitrogen  -free  extract,"  were 
comparatively  low.  The  authors  attribute  this  to  the  presence  of  the 
material  called  "  undetermined  constituents,"  and  advance  the  opinion 
that  this  material  does  not  consist  of  carbohydrates  though  included 
in  this  group  by  the  ordinary  analytical  methods.  The  thoroughness 
with  which  the  different  members  of  the  carbohydrate  group  were 
digested  by  the  horse  and  other  farm  animals  is  discussed  in  the  fol- 
lowing section. 


"Arch.  Physiol.  [Pfliiger],  93  (1902),  p.  98. 


44 


COMPARATIVE  DIGESTIBILITY  BY  HORSES  AND  RUMINANTS. 

In  computing  the  digestible  nutrients  furnished  by  different  feeding 
stuff's,  it  has  been  a  common  custom  to  use  available  data  obtained  from 
digestion  experiments  with  farm  animals  without  distinguishing 
between  ruminants  and  nonruminants,  although  differences  had  been 
pointed  out  by  a  number  of  observers.  The  extended  investigations 
of  Wolff a  and  his  associates  on  the  comparative  digestive  power  of 
horses  and  sheep  furnished  much  information  on  the  subject.  Dietrich 
and  Konig^  summarized  the  available  data  regarding  the  question  and 
discussed  it.  The  matter  was  also  considered  in  the  summary  pre- 
pared by  fiord  an  and  Hall/ 

The  following  table  compares  the  coefficients  of  digestibility  obtained 
with  ruminants  (chiefly  sheep)  and  horses,  the  values  given  being  the 
average  of  a  large  number  of  European  and  American  experiments. 

Table  4. — Comparison  of  digestibility  of  a  number  of  different  feeding  stuffs  by  ruminants 

and  horses. 


Feeding  stuffs. 

Num- 
ber of 
experi- 
ments. 

Protein. 

Fat. 

Nitro- 
gen- 
free  ex- 
tract. 

Crude 
fiber. 

Meadow  hay: 

Ruminants 

178 
30 

Per  ct. 
58.6 
57.1 

Per  ct. 
53.6 
20.7 

Perct. 
63.5 
56.7 

P(  r  d. 
GO.  9 

39.7 

1.5 

32.9 

6.8 

21.2 

Timothy  hay: 

Ruminants . 

Horses 

6 

2 

48.1 
21.2 

47!  3 

64.0 
47.3 

46.6 
42.6 

Difference  

26.9 

5.4 

16.7 

4.0 



Red-clover  hay: 

56 
5 

58.6 
55.7 

57.2 
28.7 

65.7 
63.5 

50.0 

Horses 

37.4 

2.9 

28.5 

2.2 

12.6 

Alfalfa  hay; 

Ruminants 

32 
12 

72.7 
74.6 

48.8 
19.1 

-66.6 

70.  2 

43.  7 

Horses 

39.0 

-1.9 

29.7 

-3.0 

4.7 

Wheat  straw: 

Ruminants 

3 
6 

23.4 
27.7 

35.6 
65.7 

38.7 
28.1 

55.5 

17.7 

Difference 

-4.3 

-30.1 

10.6 

37.8 

Ground  corn  shives: 

Ruminants 

9 
2 

46.7 
67.5 

78.2 
59.8 

00.4 
47.0 

57.0 

Horses 

54.6 

-20.  8 

18.4 

13.4 

2.4 

Oats: 

Ruminants 

19 
36 

79.0 
79.6 

84.9 
72.1 

76.3 

75.8 

30.2 

Horses 

29.7 

Difference  

-0.6 

12.8 

0.5 

0.5 

«Loc.  cit.,  p.  60. 

kZusammensetzung  und  Verdaulichkeit  der  Futtermittel,  2.  ed.,  vol.  2,  pp.  1070,1128. 

"US.  Dept.  Agr.,  Office  of  Experimental  Stations  Bui.  77. 


45 


Table  4.  —  Comparison  of  digestibility  of  a  number  of  different  feeding  stuff*  by  ruminants 

and  horses— Continued. 


Feeding  Btuffc. 

Num- 
ber of 
experi- 
ments. 

Protein. 

F;<U. 

N  i  I  r. .- 

gen- 
tract 

Crude 
fiber. 

Corn  meal: 

13 
4 

PercL 

71.1 
76.0 

92.  1 
67. 1 

Per  el. 

'.'I.:; 

Per  el. 

20.2 

-4.9 

25. 8 

0.4 

33.6 

Field  beans: 

18 

88.1 
85.9 

IS.  2 

91.6 
93.  6 

71.9 

65.4 



2.2         73.5 

-2.0 

6.5 

Potatoes: 

Ruminants 

Horses 

11 

1 

56.]           2.4 
88.0    

90.3 
99.4 

"'9.1 

—31.9           ■>  4        -9  1 

-9.1 

As  it  will  he  seen  in  nearly  every  case  the  ruminants  digested  a  larger 
percentage  of  fat,  carbohydrates,  and  crude  fiber  than  horses,  the  differ- 
ences being  most  marked  in  the  case  of  the  crude  fiber.  These  results. 
are,  it  seems  fair  to  say,  in  accord  with  what  might  be  expected  from 
differences  in  the  digestive  organs  of  the  different  classes  of  animals. 
The  ruminants  have  an  opportunity  to  chewT  their  food  more  thoroughly 
than  horses  and  retain  it  longer  in  the  digestive  tract.  It  is  said  that 
on  an  average  horses  retain  their  food  4  days  or  less;  cattle,  3  or  4  to 
7  or  8  days;  sheep  or  goats  from  3  or  4  days  with  ordinary  rations  to 
7  or  8  days  when  straw  is  eaten.  That  the  food  is  actually  more  finely 
divided  by  ruminants  in  chewing  and  digesting  is  indicated  by  the 
mechanical  condition  of  the  feces;  those  from  horses  containing  an 
abundance  of  fairly  large  fragments  of  hay  and  other  coarse  fodders, 
etc..  while  the  feces  of  cattle  commonly  contain  undigested  residue  in 
a  finer  state  of  division.  In  the  case  of  sheep  the  feces  contain  the 
undigested  residue  in  still  smaller  fragments.  It  is  well  known  that 
fineness  of  division  is  an  important  factor  in  considering  the  thorough- 
ness of  digestion.  The  length  of  time  an}'  given  food  material  remains 
in  the  digestive  tract  is  also  important.  It  is  perhaps  generally  believed 
that  crude  fiber  is  chiefly  digested  by  the  action  of  bacteria  in  the 
intestine  and  it  is  obvious  that  the  longer  materials  remain  in  the  intes- 
tine the  greater  the  opportunity  for  the  action  of  such  micro-organisms. 

Weiser  and  Zalischek/'  in  their  investigation  of  the  digestibility  of 
the  different  constituents  of  the  carbohydrate  group,  report  results 
obtained  with  a  horse  and  other  farm  animals.  In  nearly  every  case 
the  rations  were  made  up  of  different  combinations  of  meadow  hay. 
broom-corn  seed,  and  oats.  It  is  interesting  to  compare  the  average 
digestibility  by  different  farm  animals  of  the  constituents  into  which 

«Loc.  cit. 


46 

the  carbohydrate  group  was  divided.     In  the,  case,  of  pentosans  a  steer 

digested  on  an  average  63.4,  sheep  53.6,  horse  45.5,  and  swine  47.9 
per  cent.  In  the  ease  of  crude  fiber  the  values  were,  steer  50,  sheep 
55.1,  horse  40.6,  and  swine  22.8  per  cent.  The  values  for  starch  were, 
for  a  steer  96.6,  sheep  89.4,  horse  93.1,  and  swine  98.3.  The  values 
for  the  undetermined  constituents  were,  for  a  steer  44.8,  sheep  3jJ.9, 
horse  42.3,  and  swine  28  per  cent,  and  for  total  nitrogen-free  extract, 
steer  74.7,  sheep  68.5,  horse  71.1,  and  swine  85.6  per  cent.  As  will 
be  observed  the  horse,  generally  speaking,  digested  different  carbo- 
hydrates less  thoroughly  than  the  ruminants  but  more  thoroughly  than 
the  swine. 

The  faet  that,  other  things  being  equal,  horses  digest  their  feed  less 
thoroughly  than  cattle,  i.  e.,  retain  less  nutritive  material  from  any 
given  ration  when  it  passes  through  the  digestive  tract,  has  been  long 
recognized.  For  this  reason  horse  manure  is  richer  than  manure  from 
cattle.  In  other  words,  the  horse  manure  contains  a  larger  proportion 
of  the  ration  than  cow  manure,  and  hence,  more  of  the  nitrogen  and 
mineral  matter,  especially  phosphoric  acid  and  potash,  originally  pres- 
ent in  the  ration.  Investigations  carried  on  by  I.  P.  Roberts,  G.  C. 
Watson,  and  others  at  the  New  York  Cornell  Station0  have  to  do  with 
this  subject. 

The  value  of  the  manure  produced  by  horses  was  studied  by  Armsby  b 
at  the  Pennsylvania  Station.  Observations  made  with  a  number  of 
horses  indicate  that  a  horse  produces  annually  about  12,700  pounds  of 
fresh  manure,  not  including  the  amount  dropped  while  at  work.  This 
quantity,  which  would  be  worth  about  $13.50  as  fertilizer,  would 
require  the  use  of  about  2, 500  pounds  of  straw  for  bedding.  According 
to  the  author's  calculations  a  ton  of  wheat  straw  economically  used  for 
bedding  horses  may  result  in  6  tons  of  fresh  manure,  although  in  gen- 
eral practice  the  amount  is  not  likely  to  exceed  5  tons  and  may  be 
much  less  if  few  animals  are  kept  or  the  manure  is  infrequently 
removed. 

RATIONS  ACTUALLY  FED  AND  FEEDING  STANDARDS. 

The  amount  of  the  different  feeding  stuffs  required  and  hence  the 
quantity  of  nutrients  supplied  to  horses  may  be  learned  by  observa- 
tion or  experiment  or  a  combination  of  the  two  methods.  Doubtless 
all  practical  horse  feeders  supply  rations  which  they  believe  are  suited 
to  their  horses'  needs,  and  in  stables  where  horses  are  fed  in  any  con- 
siderable number  economy  demands  that  the  amount  fed  shall  be  fixed 
and  not  vary  according  to  the  wishes  of  the  feeder.  When  the  feed- 
ing stuffs  used  are  weighed  and  the  condition  of  the  horses  is  noted,  a 

«  See  especially  New  York  Cornell  Station  Bui.  56,  p.  169. 
b  Pennsylvania  Station  Rpt.  1892,  p.  79. 


47 

feeding  experiment  results.  Using  average  values  obtained  from 
many  more  or  less  complicated  feeding  experiments  and  other  investi- 
gations, so-called  feeding  standards  have  been  devised  which  are 
designed  to  show  the  amount  of  the  different  nutrients  required  per 

day  for  various  conditions  of  work  and  rest.  For  the  sake  of  uni- 
formity, the  standards  are  usually  calculated  on  the  uniform  basis  of 
1,000  pounds  live  weight.  The  feeding  standards  show  the  amount  of 
protein,  fat.  and  carbohydrates  required  daily,  and  often  the  nutritive 
ratio  also;  that  is,  the  ratio  of  protein  to  the  sum  of  the  carbohydrates 
and  2.25  times  the  fat.  It  is  also  possible  to  express  the  feeding  standards 
in  terms  of  protein  and  energy,  since  the  functions  of  food,  as  pre- 
viously stated,  are  to  build  and  repair  tissue  and  supply  energy, 
protein  alone  serving  for  the  former  purpose,  while  all  the  nutrients 
yield  energy.  The  best  known  feeding  standards  for  horses  and  other 
farm  animals  are  those  computed  by  Wolif  and  revised  by  Lehmann. 

Very  frequently  so-called  standards  for  horses  have  been  proposed 
which  have  shown  the  quantities  of  feeding  stuffs  required;  for  instance, 
the  pounds  of  oats  and  hay  needed  per  day  per  1,000  pounds  live 
weight.  Such  standards,  or  more  properly  standard  rations,  have 
been  adopted  in  many  countries  for  army  horses,  and  in  other  cases 
where  large  numbers  of  horses  are  fed  under  uniform  conditions.  The 
digestible  nutrients  furnished  by  such  standard  rations  can  be  calcu- 
lated by  the  aid  of  figures  showing  the  average  composition  and  diges- 
tibility of  the  feeding  stuffs.  Such  calculations  have  been  often  made, 
especially  by  earlier  investigators,  on  the  basis  of  data  secured  by 
digestion  experiments  with  ruminants.  However,  this  method  can  not 
give  the  most  satisfactor}T  results.  If  possible,  coefficients  of  digesti- 
bility obtained  in  experiments  with  horses  should  be  used. 

Standard  rations  and  feeding  standards  have  been  proposed  b\T 
Grandeau  and  Leclerc,  Lavalard,  and  others.  These  French  investi- 
gators based  their  recommendations  chiefly  on  investigations  with  the 
horses  of  the  Paris  cab  companies  and  the  French  army.  The  work 
extended  over  a  number  of  }Tears  and  thousands  of  horses  were 
included.  In  connection  with  the  work  the  digestibility  of  the  ration 
was  determined. 

In  compiling  this  bulletin  letters  were  addressed  to  express  com- 
panies, cab  companies,  fire  companies,  and  other  organizations  in  dif- 
ferent cities  of  the  United  States  using  large  numbers  of  horses, 
requesting  information  regarding  the  rations  fed.  Information  was 
also  secured  regarding  the  average  weight  of  the  horses.  Similar 
values  regarding  horses  fed  by  a  number  of  cab  companies,  etc.,  in 
foreign  countries  were  compiled  from  available  published  data.  The 
rations  fed  army  horses  in  the  United  States  and  other  countries  were 
also   learned   by  correspondence   and    by  compilation   from  various 


48 

sources  and  included  for  purposes  of  comparison  as  were  also  data 
regarding  tlie  rations  fed  in  a  large  number  of  experiments  carried  on 
at  the  experiment  stations  in  this  country,  only  those  tests  being 
selected  in  which  the  horses  maintained  their  weight. 

No  attempt  has  been  made  to  gather  statistics  regarding  race  horses, 
hunters,  fancy  coach  and  driving  horses,  and  similar  animals,  as  the 
main  purpose  of  the  table  was  to  learn  the  value  of  the  rations  fed  farm 
and  other  work  horses  in  this  country.  The  table  below  shows  the 
nutrients  furnished  per  1,000  pounds  live  weight  by  these  rations  and 
also  the  calculated  digestible  nutrients  and  the  total  energy  supplied  by 
them.  In  most  cases  the  values  for  digestible  nutrients  were  calcu- 
lated by  the  aid  of  coefficients  of  digestibility  obtained  in  experiments 
with  horses  and  referred  to  on  a  preceding  page  (41).  From  the*  data 
thus  collected  the  average  quantities  of  nutrients  furnished  by  the 
rations  of  horses  performing  like  amounts  of  work  were  calculated. 
For  purposes  of  comparison  the  Wolff-Lehmann  feeding  standards  are 
also  included  in  the  table  as  well  as  standards  or  averages  proposed  by 
Lavalard  and  a  number  of  other  investigators. 

Table  5. — Rations  actually  fed  to  horses  and  digestible  nutrients  and  energy  in  rations 
calculated  to  basis  of  1,000  pounds  live  weight. 


Nutrients  in  ration  per 
1,000  pounds  live 
weight. 


Rations 
actually  fed. 


ARMY    HORSES. 

United  States: 

Cavalrv 


Artiller- 


ies. 


C2 


Digestible  nutrients  in  i: 
ration  per  1.000  £ 
pounds  live  weight.       ~ 


Mules 1.025 

Great  Britain: 

In  quarters 1,125 


In  camp . 
Cabs 


With  extra  issue... 

Mules     (heavy 
work). 

Mules  in  camp 

Small  mules 


Small     mules     in    |     BKn 
camp.  /    ^ 

Registered  horses. .   1, 125 


Pound*.  Lbs. 

JOats,  12 1  „ 

{Hay,  14 /  2'14 

[Oats,  12 1 

\Hay,  14 J  -W 

/Oats.  9 I  j 

\Hay.  14 \f  1>8a 

lOats,  10 1 

^Hav.  12 }  2.16 

[Straw,  8 J 

I  Oats,  12 1  „  n 

\Hav.  12 /  2-n 

Oat's,  10 \  t  Q.-, 

Hav,  12 /  1-J- 

Oats,  12 1 

Hay,  12 }  2.35 

Straw,  8 J 

Oats,  10 1 

Hav.  12 }  2.37 

Straw,  8 J 

JOats.  12 1      31 

\Hay,  12 f  I61 

fOats,  5 1 

may,  10 }  2.22 

[Straw.  13 I 

tek::::::}^ 
te::::d}^ 


Lbs.     Lbs.     Lbs. 

0.90 

.84 


It 


.78 


12.  82 
11.96 
11.39 


.84    12.42 


10.76 
9.72 


4.95 
4.62 
4.80 


Lbs.     Lbs.     Lbs.  \  Lbs.     Calo- 
ries. 

1.25  0.57  8.00  1.97  23,300 
1.16  .53  7.4S  1.84  21,7.50 
1.00       .48|     6.88     1.94  20.2-50 


I 
23      1. 


44      7.32      1.79  21,400 


1.47        .43     7.35     1.38  20,750 
1.32       .36     6.57     1.32,18,650 


.92    13.46      6.42      1.53        .51      8.11  1.84  23,500 

•     ! 

.92    13.63     6.84     1.51       .49     8.04  1.96  23,450 

I 

,S8   11.81     4.17      1.61        .47     8.27  1.5122,750 

.86    14.24      9.21      1.26        .44      7.14  2.33  21,800 

10.12      4.28      1.34        .32      6. 6o'  1.6019,050 

13.12     3.92|     1.83,       .  6l'     9.28J  1.37  25,800 


.71 
1.02 


49 

Table  5.     Rations  actually  fed  to  horses  and  </i</<»h/>/<1  nutrients  and  energy  in  rationi 
calculated  to  basis  of  1,000  pounds  live  weight — Continued. 


Nutrients  In  ration  per 

tible  nutrients  In 

m 

1,000     pounds 

live 

rati  0  n 

per 

1,000 

Z 

we 

gbt. 

pounds  li 

,'iit. 

7 

i 

e 

Rations 

s 

u 

-r  8 

Z 

~ 

actually  fed. 

-I 

0  2 

| 

93  C 

4 

tcZ 

£ 

>.~ 

St 

"a 

U    0> 

Qj 

'- 

-    - 

| 

£ 

£ 

y 

I 

s 

y. 

a 

ak.my  horses — cont'd. 

France: 

Peace    footing, 

maintenance  ra- 

Lbs. 

Pounds. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

U)s. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

Calo- 

tion- 

ries. 

Reserve  

1,050 

fOats,  13.01 

1  Hay,  8.82 

\  2.09 

0.83 

10.81 

3.4! 

1.50 

0.49 

1.21 

21, 1.50 

Line 

1,050 
850 

(Oats,  11.46  .... 

|  1.84 

.73 

9.50 

2.99 

1.31 

.  13 

6.65 

1.06 

18,550 
20, 400 

Light  cavalry  . 

\Hav,  7.72 

(Oats,  10.36  .... 
\Hav,  6.61 

1  2.  01 

.80 

10. 42 

3.24 

1.45 

.47 

7. 32 

1.14 

Artillery    and 
train. 

1,075 

(Oat's,  12.35  .... 
\Hav,  8.49 

}  1.94 

.  77 

10.07 

3.19 

1.39 

.45 

7.03 

1.13 

19,  650 

Mules 

950 

(Oats,  10.8 

\Hay.  7.5 

1  1.94 

.77 

9.99 

3.18 

1.38 

.44 

6.98 

1.13 

19,500 

War  footing,  main- 

tenance ration — 

Reserve 

1,050 

fOats,  14.7 

\Hay,  8.82 

)■  2.27 

.90 

11.75 

3.58 

1.63 

.54 

8.28 

1.26 

23,050 

Line 

1,050 

JOats,  13.54 

\Hay,  7.72 

(Oats,  11.76.... 
(Hay,  6.61 

[■  2.05 

.83 

10.65 

3. 20 

1.48 

.50 

7.  52 

1.12 

20,900 

Light  cavalry  . 

850 

)■  2.19 

.88 

11.39 

3.41 

1.59 

■« 

8.05 

1.19 

22,400 

Artillery    and 
train. 

}l,075 

(Oats,  14.2 

\Hay,  8.49 

[•  2. 13 

.86 

11.07 

3.38 

1.53 

„ 

7.80 

1.18 

21,700 

Germany: 

* 

Heavy  ration— 

[Oats,  11.16.... 

] 

Garrison 

1,050 

{  Hay,  5.58 

(Straw,  7.81.... 
[Oats,12.27.... 

[  1.88 

.80 

11.29 

5.19 

1.  25 

..50 

6.81 

1.33 

19,550 

March 

1,050 

{ Ha v,  3.34 

[Straw.  3.9 

[Oats,  12.61.... 

1.66 

1 

.72 

9.59 

3.41 

1.19 

.48 

6.36 

.93 

17,800 

Field 

1,050 

{ Ha v,  3.34 

[Straw,  3.9 

V  1.70 

.74 

9.77 

3.45 

1.22 

.49 

6.50 

.  94  18, 150 

Light  cavalry 
in  garrison. 

}l,050 

[Oats,  10.6 

Hav,  5.58 

[Straw,  7.81....' 

I  1.83 

.  77 

10.97 

5.13 

1.21 

.4S 

6.57 

1.31 

18,950 

Light   cavalry 
on  march. 

}l,050 

[Oats,  11.5 ' 

{  Ha  v.  3.34 

[Straw,  3.9 

I  1.58 

.70 

9.15 

3.33 

1.13 

.46 

6.04 

.90 

16,  950 

Light  cavalry 
in  field. 

}l,050 

[Oats,  12.61.... 

Hav,  3.34 

[Straw,  3.39.... 

I  1.69 

.73 

9.58 

3.27 

1.21 

.49 

6.45 

.90 

17,950 

Light  ration- 

[Oats,  9.48 

1 

Garrison 

1,050 

{Hav,  5.58 

lStraw,7.81.... 
[Oats,  10.6 : 

I  1.70 

1 

.71 

10.35 

5.03 

1.10 

.44 

6.11 

1.29 

17,6"»0 

March 

1,050 

{Hay,  3.34 ' 

[Straw.  3.9 

|Oats,  11.16.... 

I  1.50 

1 

.65 

8.66 

3.24 

1.07 

.42 

5.66 

.88 

15,900 

Held 

1,050 

{Hav,  3.34 

[Straw,  3.9 

I  1.54 

.68 

8.97 

3.30 

1.10 

.44 

5.90 

.89 

16,550 

OMNIBUS    HOKSES. 

France: 

[Beans,  1.4 

Corn,  6.9 

| 

Paris,  1879 

1,240 

{Oats,  10.1 

I  2.61 

.81 

16.44 

5.19 

1.73 

.44 

10.55 

1.43 

27,350 

Hav,  9.1 

[Straw,  10.5... 

[Beans,  1.4 

\ 

Corn,  8.3 

Paris,  1880 

1,240 

{Oats,  8.8 

Hay,  7.8 

[Straw,  11.1....  1 

V  2.52 

.76 

16.41 

4.97 

1.65 

.42 

10.60 

1.31 

27,000 

173WJ— No.  125—03 


Table  5.  —  Rations  actually  fed  to  horses  and  digestible  nutrients  and  energy  in  rations 
calculated  to  basis  of  1,000  pounds  live  weight — Continued. 


OMNIBUS   Hoksks- 

continued. 


Prance— Continued. 
Paris,  1884 


Paris,  1885 


Paris,  1886 


'  Paris,  1887  . 


Average 


STREET-CAR  HORSES. 

Great  Britain: 

London  


Liverpool 


Glasgow 


Dublin 


Various    European 
cities: 


Bremen 


Brussels 


Bordeaux,  winter  . 
Bordeaux,  summer 

Hamburg 


Nutrients  in  ration  per 
1,000  pounds  live 
weight. 


Rations 
actually  fed. 


Lbs. 


1,240 


1,210  J 


1.240 


1,240^ 


Pounds. 

Beans,  1.4 
Bran,  0.9. . 
Corn,  8.5.. 

Oats,  8.7  . . 
Hav,  8.5  . . 
Straw,  8.7. 
Beans,  0.9 
Bran,  0.8  . 
Corn,  11.3. 
Oats,  6.2  . . 
Hay,  8.5  . . 
Straw,  8.4. 
Beans,  0.1 
Bran,  0.5  . 
Corn,  13  . . 
Oats,  5.5  . . 
Hav,  8.0  . . 
Straw,  7.3. 
(Corn,  10.8. 
Oats,  8.1.., 
Hav.  8.7  . . 
Straw,  8.2. 


1,150 


1,150 


1,150 


1,150 


1,150 


1,150 


1,150 


1,150 


1,150 


[Corn,  7  . . 
Oats,  3... 
Peas,  3  .. 
Hay,  12.. 
[Straw,  1  . 
[Beans,  4 . 
Corn, 12  . 
Bran.l  .. 
Hay,  14.. 
[Corn,  11  . 
Oats,  6... 
Bran,  0.5. 
Hav,  8.5  . 
Straw,  1  . 
Corn, 14  . 
Oats,  3 . . . 
Bran,  0.5. 
Hay,  12.. 


{Corn,  14.3. 
Oats,  2.2  . . 
Peas,  1.1 . . 
Hay,  8.8  . . 
Straw,  2.2. 
{Corn,  7.7.. 
Oats,  11... 
Hay,  4.4  . . 
Straw,  3.3. 
I  Corn,  15.4. 
Hav,  13.2  . 
IStraw,  1.1. 

I  Corn,  11  .. 
Oats,  4.4  . . 
Hav,  13.2  . 
Straw,  1.1. 
!Corn,  17.6. 
Oats,  1.7  . . 
Hay,  7.7  . . 
Straw,  4.4. 


Lbs. 


2. 65 


2.  19 


2.  32 


2.55 


1.73 


1.91 


1.81 


1.86 


Lbs. 


0.78 


a" 


Lbs. 


16.18 


.68    16.06 


.73   16.16 


42 


i.  52 


.45    11.52 


.43 


.57 


12 


11.46 


10.44 


11.23 


12.  84 


Lbs. 


4.64 


4.38 


4.04 


4.41 


Digestible  nutrients 
in  ration  per  1,000 
pounds  live  weight. 


IJbs.     Lbs. 


0.43 


o  * 


Lbs. 


1.58 


1.43 


.34 


11.09 


11.22 


Lbs. 


c<  <  lo- 
ries. 


1  2M    27,550 


.40    10. 


1.20 


1.11 


1.22 


27,  3.50 


27, 050 


1.00     .40  10. SS     1. -20  27.220 


1.94 


2.74 


2.24 


2.  26 


2.  90 


2.48 


1.23 


1.72 


1.11 


1.10 


1.04 


1.13 


15 


13 


.  35 


.13 


.22 


1.03      .19 


7.01 

.90 

17,650 

8.95 

1.04 

22,380 

8.13 

.73 

19,590 

9.01 

.87 

21,360 

8.80 

.71 

20, 480 

7.64 

.64 

18,930 

8.87 

.91 

20,700 

8.33 

1.01  20,430 

9.70 

.69 

22, 030 

51 

Table  5. — Rations  actually  fed  to  hone*  and  digestibk   nutrients  <tn<l  energy  in  rations 
calculated  to  basis  of  1,000  pounds  live  weight   -< lontinued. 


Rations 
actually  fed. 

Nutrients  In  ration  per 

l.ooo     pounds     live 
weight 

litiit-     nutrients 
in    ration    per   1,000 
pounds  live  weight. 

3 

: 
- 

« 

8 

5? 

9 

u 

at 

-  e 

-  x 

H 

y. 

3 

- 

1 

a 

I 

- 

o 
u 

at 

9  E 

<-> 

%i 

2 

■=. 

a 
-0 

H 

Q 

i 

a 
w 

BTRKKT  CAB    horses— 

continued. 

Various     European 
cities— Continued. 

Munich 

Vienna 

Lbs. 

1,150 

1,150 

Pounds. 

fCorn,  6.6 

Oats,  ll 

IHav.  5.5 

[Straw,  i.i 

[Oats,  15.4 

•Hav,  11 

(Straw,  2.2 

Lbs. 

\  1.61 
\  1.84 

Lbs. 
0.58 
.73 

Lbs. 

10.59 

10.02 

Lbs. 

2.64 
3.39 

Lbs. 
1.11 
1.29 

Lbs. 

0.35 

.•13 

Lbs. 

7.  1« 
6.55 

Lbs. 
0.74 
1.13 

18,  490 

1.86 

.54 

11.05    2.54 

1.18 

.23    8.88 

.85 

20,075 

}l,200 
1,050 

/Alfalfa,  21.25  . 
\Straw,  3.2 

/Oats,  10 

[Hay,  12 

HORSES    WITH     LIGHT 

WORK. 

Driving    horse,    Wyo- 
ming station. 

Carriage  horse 

}  2.38 
}  2.06 

.18 
.76 

5.87 
10.42 

2.34 
3.87 

1.76 
1.40 

.05 
.40 

3.58 
6.97 

.92 

1.41 

11,8.55 
19,935 

2.22 

.47 

8.15 

3.10 

1.58 

.88 

5.27 

1.18 

15,895 

1,400 

1,350 
1,350 

1,350 

1,350 

1,350 

fGroundgrain, 
\    9.38. 

[Hay,18 

/Oats,  4 

\Hav,  15 

/Oats,  6 

\Hav,  10 

[Oats,  12 

{Hay,  12 

[Straw,  10 

fOats,  10 

< Bran,  2.5 

[Hay,  7 

/Oats,  12 

\Hay,9 

Fire  company  horses: 
Boston,  Mass 

Chicago,  HI 

Portland.  Me 

Albany,  X.  Y 

St.  Lous,  Mo 

New  York,  N.  Y... 

I  1.65 

1  1.00 
1    .96 

■  1.58 

•  1.46 
|  1.44 

.68 

.43 
.41 

.67 

.58 
.62 

9.57 

6.77 
5.99 

9.30 

7.76 
8.30 

4.57 

3.50 
2.57 

3.42 

2.38 
2.78 

.87 

.42 
.52 

.95 
.99 

.- 

.41 
.24 

.  12 

.39 
.4 

6.14 

3.70 
3.59 

5.91 

5.16 
0    5.4 

1.73 

1.  15 
1.04 

1.35 

.90 
5    1.0 

18,000 

11,365 
10,650 

17,050 

14,700 
715,550 

1.35 

.50 

7 .  95 

3.-201      .78 

.35     4.!M> 

1 .  •>« 

General  averaare 

1.57 

.54 

8.00 

3.18      .99 

.32 

5.06     1.24 

14,890 

for  light  work. 

}l,400 

}l,400 

1.325 
1,325 

[Corn,  4.67 

Oats,  5.33 

Corn  meal, 4.16 

[Hav.  15 

fCorn,  4.38 

Oats,  7.5 

{Bran,  0.83 

Corn  meal,.  164 

[Hay,  16 

fCorn,  2 

Oats,  19 

[Bran,  1.5 

[Hav,  9.5 

[Corn, 12  

{Oats,  5.25 

[Hay,  20 

HORSES   WITH   MOD- 
ERATE WORK. 

Express  horses: 

Richmond,     Va., 
summer. 

Richmond,     Va., 
winter. 

Jersey  City 

Boston 

'  1.79 

2.00 

2.  45 

•  2.38 

.78 

.  n; 

1.03 
1.04 

11.78 

12.88 

13.  45 
14.96 

3.64 

3.99 

3. 57 
5.32 

.'.'7 

1.12 

1.66 
1.28 

.45 

.50 

.67 
.60 

8.19 

8.93 

- 
9.  75 

1.46 

1.59 

1.32 
2.12 

21, 650 

23,750 

25,800 
27,000 

Average  

2.15       .93 

13.27     4.13     1.2fi     .55 

9.06    !-«« 

24.550 

i 

! 

52 

Table  5. — Iiations  actually  fed  to  horses  and  digestible  nutrients  and  energy  in  rations 
calculated  to  oasis  of  1 ,000  pounds  live  weight — Continued. 


HORSES  WITH  MODER- 
ATE work— cont'd. 

Cab     horses,    United 
States. 

New  York,  X.  Y  .. 


Philadelphia,  Pa  . 


Washington,  D.C. 


Do 

San  Francisco,  Cal 


Arerage  

Farm  horses: 

Wyoming  Station . 

New  Hampshire 
Station. 


Do. 

Do. 
Do. 

Do. 

Do. 
Do. 

Do. 

Do. 
Do. 
Do. 
Do. 


Rations 
actually  fed. 


Lbs 

1,200 

1,200 

1,200 

1,350 
1,350 


1,000 
1,235 

1,220 

1,230 
1,220 

1,250 

1,170 
1,280 

1,290 

1,230 
1,300 
1,175 
1,280 


Pounds. 

Oats,  14 

Hay,  10 

Corn,  17 

Oats,  9.28  .... 
Groundgrain. 

4.40.a 
Hay,  13.50  . . . 
Straw,  7.10... 

Oats,  10 

Corn,  5 

Hay,  23 

Oats,  12 

Hay,  12 

Oats,  8 

Hay,  16 


Nutrients  in  ration  per 
1,000  pounds  live 
weight. 


Lbs. 

•  1.8' 


2.01 


2.56 

1.58 

1 


1.88 


/Alfalfa,  13.75 
\Straw,  2.25... 

{Bran,  2 
Corn,  6 
Gluten  meal, 
Hay,  10 

{Bran,  2 
Corn,  6 
Oats,  8 
Hay,  10 

Hay,  10 

Bran,  7 

Corn,  8 

Corn,  8 

Linseedmeal,4 

Hay,10 

Bran,  2 

ICorn,  8 
Cotton -seed 
meal,  1. 
Hay,  10 

I  Bran,  2 
Corn, 6  
Oats,  8 
Hav,  10 

(Bran,  7 

{Corn,  8 

(Hay,  10 

iCorn  stover,  6. 
Hav,  6 
Corn,  7 
Oats,  4 
Bran,  3 

fHay,  12 

{Oats,  7 

lCorn,7 

{Corn  stover,  12 
Oats,  7 
Corn, 7 

{Corn  stover,  12 
Bran,  7 
Corn, 7 

[Hay,  12.... 
{Bran, 7  .... 
[Corn,  7 


1.85 
2. 

2.03 

2 
2.35 

1.73 

2.11 
1.96 

1.74 

1.85 
1.56 
1.94 
1.98 


Lbs. 

0.79 


82 


.80 


.78 


90 


o  0 


Lbs 

10.  72 


Lbs. 
3.53 


12.13     4.13 


9.30 

8.87 


11.51 


10.49 


11.92 


10.80 

10.44 

11.75 

9.87 

10.57 

10.97 


Digestible  nutrients 
in  ration  per  1,000 
pounds  live  weight. 


o 

03 

C  g 

c 

u  K 

?, 

2* 

8 

"S 

~ 

Ph 

fc 

£ 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 


1.20   0.53     7.06     1.37 


1.19      .50     8.05     1 


6.43 

3.42 
4.00 


1.28      .63 

. 95      .  42 
. 70     .  36 


4.30 


1.06     .49 


10.42 

5.91      1.35 
5.21      1.64 


3* 


Calo- 
ries. 

20,100 


22,350 

29,250 

17,050 
15,5.50 


7.33    1.72  20,860 


2.90 


3.00 
2.80 

2.65 


2.89 


3.50 
2.45 
2.67 
3.33 


1.37      .03     4.03 


1. 59      .  64 


1.21      .50 

1.18      .41 
1.  52      .  36 

.39 


8.18 


7.65 


18 


1.27      .44     8.58 


1.14      .40      7.36 


1.05 

1.01 
1.04 
1.30 
1.11 


40 


7.59 


46  8. 14 
40  7. 72 
8.  07 
.40 


1.03 

1.24 

1.14 
1.24 

1.05 


8,240 
21,465 

21,880 

20, 275 
19,000 

16,915 


1.29    22,485 


1.10   19,  .545 


1.40   20,360 


1.37   21,510 


1.49  21,005 
1.63  22,105 
1.30  19,900 


a  Corn  meal  and  bran,  3.07: 1.33. 


53 

Table  5.  —  Rations  actually  fed  to  horses  and  digestible  nutrients  and  energy  in  rations 
calculated  to  basis  of  1,000  pounds  live  weight — Continued. 


HORSES   WITH    MODER- 
ATE work— cont'd. 

Farm  horses— cont'd. 

New  Hampshire 
station. 


Lbs. 


Do. 


:■• 


275 


1.340 


New  Jersey  station    1 ,  000 


Do. 


Do. 


1,000 


1.150 


Do. 


1.180 


MassachusettsSta-     1,100 
tion. 


Do 1,100 


Do. 


Do. 


Utah  Station 


Do. 


Do. 


1,125 


1,200 


1.125 


Do 1,200 


Do 1,400 


Rations 
aetuallv  fed. 


Nutrient-  in  ration  per 

l.ooo     pounds    live 
weight. 


Itible  nutrient-  in 
ration  per  1,000 
pounds  live  weight. 


Poll  ltd.-'. 


Hay.  12 

Corn.  7 

Oats,  4 

Bran,  3 

Hay.  12 

Corn,  7 

Oats,  7 

Bay,  6 

Bran,  21 

Corn, 4? 

Dried  brewers' 

grain,  8f 

Hav,  6 

Bran,  2} 

Corn, 44 

Oats,  8$ 

Hay,  8 

Corn  meal, 6.25 
Dried  brewers' 

grain,  6.15. 

fHay,  8 

Corn  meal, 6. 55 
Linseed  meal, 

5.40. 

Hay,  18 

Wheat  bran,  2. 
Provender,  6= 

crushed 

corn,     2.73; 

oats,  3.27. 

Hay,  20 

Wheat  bran,  2. 
Provender,  6= 

crushed 

corn,     2.73; 

oats,  3.27. 

Hay,  15 

Wheat  bran,  2. 
Provender,  4= 

crushed 

corn,     1.73; 

oats,  2.27. 

Hay,  15 

Wheat  bran,  3. 
Provender,  6= 

crushed 

corn,     2.73 

oats,  3.27. 
Timothv  hav 

25.8. 
Corn,  23.7. 
Clover     hay 

26.1. 
Oats,  11.8.. 
Wheat,  11.8 
Clover     hav 

22.4. 
Oats,  9.7  ... 
Wheat,  9.7. 
Timothv  hav 

22.4. 
Corn,  19.4. 
Alfalfa    hav 

24.5. 
Bran     and 

shorts  (1:1), 

10. 


IM. 


1.87 


1.70 


2.23 


2.24 


2.61 


1.96 


Lbs. 


O  v 


76 


,81 


1.85 


3.12 


4.% 


2.44 


3.59 


Lbs. 


11.20 


10.81 


9.55 


11.85 


12.66 


1.30   26.06 


1.10   21.67 


98   19.33 


1.01    20.50 


11.43 


Lbs.     Lbs.       Lbs.     Lbs. 


3.36     1.03     0.42      7.66 


,21       .93       .42     7.47 


2.22       .65     6. 


2.68     1.45       .56     8.65 


1.49       .48     6.53 


2.45 


5.  25 


5.77 


4.43 


4.58 


7.  05 


7.03 


6. 39 


5.70 


1.88       .35     6.1 


.>.". 


.87 


To 


.94 


1.43 


3. 35 


3.00 


.41 


.  II 


7.04 


7.43 


5.58 


6.85 


.61    18. 


60   15.36 


.53    13.67 


Lbs. 


1.31 


1.25 


1.38 


1.00 


1.24 


1.17 


2.14 


2.37 


I.  si 


1.85 


2.53 


2.30 


,48    14.51      2.18 


28     7.99      1.88 


Calo- 
ries. 

20, 370 
19, 620 

22, 440 

23,010 
19,250 
19,425 

20,385 

21,705 
16,200 


44,815 
42,040 

36, 520 
35, 115 

24,580 


54 

Table  5.  —  Rations  actually  fed  to  horses  and  digestible  nutrient.*  and  energy  in  rations 
calculated  to  basis  of 1,000 pounds  Km  weight — Continued. 


2  Kai. 

—        actually  fed. 


HORSES  WITH    MODER- 
ATE work — cont'd. 

Lbs.  Pounds. 

Farm  horses— cont'd. 

{Alfalfa  hay, 
25. 
Bran  and 
shorts  (1:1), 
10. 
(Timothy  hav. 
22.8. 

Do 1,325  •{Bran     and 

shorts  (1:1), 
I    10. 

fimothvhav, 
23.5. 
ran     and 
shorts  (1:1), 
12.2. 
1  Alfalfa     hav, 
24.5. 
Bran     and 
shorts  (1:1), 
12.2. 
(Alfalfa     hav, 
25. 
Bran     and 
shorts  (1:1), 
14.6. 
(Alfalfa     hav, 

.     16- 
Do 1, 120 ^B  ran     and 

shorts  (1:1), 

1    12.6. 

(Timothy  hav, 

Do 1,230-^     13.7. 

[Oats.  12 

(Alfalfa    hay, 

{     14.7. 

[Oats,  11.5 

Do 1,385   Alfalfa    hay, 

19.7. 

Do 1,385  Alfalfa    hav, 

19.9. 

Do 1,420  Alfalfa    hay, 

32.6. 

jfHav,  19.3 

Virginia  station...    1,460   g™<  *%££ 

[    23.1. 

(Hay,  16 

I  Com,  14.1 


Nutrients  in  ration  per 
1,000  pounds  live 
weight. 


Digestible  nutrients  « 
in  ration  per  1,000  £ 
pounds  live  weight.      V. 


Lbs.     Lbs. 


-  - 

-  ■- 

z  X 

-  :. 


Lbs.     Lbs. 


B  - 
set: 

S  M 


Lbs.      Lbs.      IJ.s 


Do 1.420 


Do 1,400 


Do 1.400 


Do 1.235 


0.71    11.83     5.16 


2.81     0.29     8.27    L 


2.17 
2.28 
3.82 
4.14 

3.75 

1.81 

2.80 
2.04 
2.06 

3.2S 


Do. 


1,155 


Average 


Oeueral  average 
for  moderate 
work. 


Y  1.95 
}  2.10 


2.46 
2.38 


75   11.93 


7  s 


75   12.29 


,83 


7^ 


1.00 


12. 20 


13.39 


10.84 

10.65 
6.07 
6.14 
9.80 

13.70 
14.73 


.75  11.92 
.77  11.99 


6.61      1.11 


5.51     1.23 


5. 09     2. 


5.  32      3. 14 


3.  %     2. ! 


4.  66 

3.56 
3.59 
5.74 

4.92 
4.28 


2.15 
1.52 
1.54 
2.45 

.81 
.92 


4.05 
4.  OS 


1.57 
1.49 


.42 


44 


6.56 


6.82 


31         v.  ",v 


.38     9. 


4-     6.79 


.  06 
.  06 
.10 


4.26 
4.31 


.  49     9.  IS 
.48    10.44 


.40 
.42 


8.09 
8.09 


2.31 

1.91 
1.99 

1.45 

1.6-5 

1.42 
1.39 

1.40 
2.  24 

2. 25 

1.71 


Calo- 
26,  48t 

20,  346 

21.015 
26, 615 
28,  555 

25,  615 

19,700 

22,  715 
16,435 
13. 740 
21,940 

24, 815 
26,335 


1.62  22.760 

1.63  22.710 


Farm  mules.  Virginia   \.  oin 
Station.  f1*610 


Do. 


1.190 


Do 1  020 


Hav,  15.2 

Corn,  10.5 

Corn    silage, 

10.5. 

Hav,  14.5 

Corn,  9  2 

Hav,  9.8 

Corn,  6.1 

Corn     silage, 

12.2. 


1.70 

.82 

12.00 

4.00 

.72 

.42 

8.  22 

1.75 

1.54 

.72 

10.86 

3.70 

.62 

.34 

7.34 

1.50 

1.46 

.69 

10.29 

3.61 

.61 

.36 

6.96 

1.65 

21,655 
19,030 
18,670 


55 

Table  5.     Ration*  actually  fed  to  hones  <nt<i  digestible  nutrients  and  energy  in  rationt 
calculated  to  basis  of  1,000  pounds  live  weight  -Continued. 


i 

o 

A 

o 

I 

I 

Rations 
actually  fed. 

Nutrients  In  ration  per 
1,000     pounds      live 

ireight. 

Digestible  nutrients 

in    ration  per    1,000 
pounds  live  weight 

2 

I 

PM 

£ 

4) 

tx  - 

£* 
z  ■ 

E 

1 
0 

2 
0 

a 

"5 

1 

■z 

0> 

J 

.  - 

p 
'2 

-_ 
3 

c 

V 

c  B 

'"  S3 

.  a 

a 
w 

HORSES   WITH    MODER- 

ATK   WORK — Cont'd. 

Farm  mules,  Virginia 

Station. 

Do 

Lbs. 

Jl,080 

1,275 
1,225 

Pounds. 

fHay,  13.4 

\Corn,  11.8 

fHay,  16.6 

ICorn,  10.5 

ICorn    silage, 
[    14.6. 

/Hav,  11.7 

\Corn,  9.9 

Lbs. 
\  1.88 

•  1.84 

\  1.41 

Lbs. 

0.90 

.88 

.67 

Lbi. 

13.18 

12. 96 
9.93 

Lbs. 
3.83 

4.38 

Lbs. 

0.82 

.78 

Lbs. 
(1.41 

.46 

.32 

Lbs. 
9.34 

8.84 

7.00 

Lbs. 
1.54 

1.96 

Calo- 
ries. 

23, 510 
23. 480 

Do 

2.94 

.61 

1.18    17,700 

J 

1.64       .78 

11.54 

3.74 

.69 

.39 

7.95 

1.60  20,675 

|l,500 

|l,500 

1,500 
1,600 
j>l,600 

}l,600 

/Oats,  7.5 

lHav,20 

(Oats,  2 

lBran,2.5 

lOil  meal, 0.2. . 

[Hay,  20 

/Oats,  15 

\Hay,12 

/Oats,  23 

\Hay,  12 

/Oats,  19 

\Hay,13 

(Oats,  12.5 

Corn,  6.75 

{ Ground  grain, 

a4. 
[Hay,  10 

HORSES  WITH  SEVERE 
WORK. 

Truck  and  draft  horses: 
Chicago,  111.,  daily 
ration. 

Chicago,  111.,  holi- 
day ration. 

SouthOmaha.Xebr. 

New  York,  N.  Y 

Washington,  D.  C, 
summer. 

Washington,  D.  C, 
winter. 

}  1.38 

t  1.25 

}  1.65 
j-  2.14 
}  1.88 

1  1.93 

.58 

.47 

.70 
.91 
.79 

.81 

8.99 

7.74 

9.57 
11.96 
10.74 

11.19 

4.34 

4.16 

3.27 
3.54 
3.49 

2.83 

.64 
.53 

1.04 

1.44 
1.21 

1.25 

.34 

.26 

.45 
.61 
.53 

.51 

5.11 

4.11 

6.23 
8.10 
7.11 

8.16 

1.79 

1.75 

1.27 
1.33 
1.34 

1.03 

15,450 

13,000 

17,800 
22,800 
20,200 

21,550 

Average     (omit- 

1.80 

.76 

10.49 

3.49 

1.12 

.491    6.94 

1.35  19,560 

ting    holiday 
ration). 

Draft    horses,    heavy, 
hard    work.      Sid- 

FARM    HORSES,    SETTE- 
GAST'S   ESTIMATE. 

Light  work 

I2.OOO 

1,250 
1,250 
1,250 

fBeans,  6 

J  Oats,  13 

] Corn, 3 

[Clover,  15 

fOats,  8 

^Hay,  7.5 

[Straw,  3 

Oats,  10 

Hav,  10 

[Straw,  3 

lOats,  13 

^Hay,  12 

[Straw,  3 

I  3.87 

{  1.29 
1  1.64 
1  2.04 

.75 

.50 
.63 
.79 

11.72 

7.45 

9.23 

11.31 

3.11 

2.83 
3.50 
4.16 

1.94 

.87 
1.11 

1.40 

.28 

.29 
.35 
.45 

5.86 

4.61 
5.80 
7.24 

1.56   18,590 
.91    13, 10  J 

Moderate  work 

Heavy  work 

1.17    16,500 
1.40   20,650 

FEEDING       STANDARDS 
AND     AVERAGE     RA- 
TIONS. 

Light     work,     Wolff- 

1.5 
2.0 

2.5 

.40 
.60 
.80 

9 

22, 150 

Lehmann. 
Medium  work,  Wolff- 

11.0 

13.3 

26,  700 

Lehmann. 
Heavy    work,    Wolff- 
Lehmann. 

32,  750 

<«Bran.  cornmeal,  and  cut  hay  2  : 1.6  :  4. 


56 


Table  5.  —  Rations  actually  fed  to  horses  and  digestible  nutrients  and  energy  in  rations 
calculated  /<>  basis  of  1,000  pounds  live  weight — Continued. 


/ 

0 
A 

— 
'~ 

Rations 
actually  fed. 

Nutrients  in  ration  per 
1,000     pounds      live 
weight. 

Digestible  nutrients  in     £ 
ration      per     1.000     £ 
pounds  live  weight.       7 

a 
to 

s 

- 

— 

- 
u 

-T  ~ 

II 

— 

Z 

- 
- 

"Z 

Q 
ft 

I 

0 

u 

-  - 

81 

z  M 

-  - 
— 

Crude  fiber. 

Energy    In    di| 
nutrients. 

FEEDING       STANDARDS 
AND     AVERAGE      RA- 
TIONS— continued. 

Maintenance,   moder- 

Lbs. 

Pounds. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

Lbs. 

Lbs.     Lbs. 
2.  14        .  SS 

1.95        .44 

1. 60        .40 

1.10 
1.30 

Lbs.     Calo- 
ries. 
11. 15        26, 900 

ate  work,  original, 
Grandeau. 

9. 93        23, 950 

ate  work,  modified, 
Grandeau. 

12.14         r>7.'>00 

Lawes    &    Gilbert's 
computation. 

nll.O 
oll.O 

5.  27 

5.06 

7.33 

8.09 
8.09 
7. 96 

6.94 

22, 510 

lard. 

22,880 

AMERICAN      EXPERI- 
MENTS. 

Horses    with    light 
work: 
Driving  horses 

1.58 

.22 

1. 18  15, 895 

.99       .32 

1. 06       .49 

1.  57       .  40 

1.49       .42 

.69       .39 

1. 12        -  49 

1.  24  14, 890 

Horses  with  moderate 
work: 
Express  and   cab 
horses. 

L.  72(20, 860 

1.62  22,760 

General  average.. . 

1.  63  22.  710 

Mules  with  moderate 



1.60  20,675 

work:  Farm  mules. 
Horses    with    severe 

1.3519,560 

work:    Truck     and 
draft  horses. 

<i  This  value  represents  total  carbohydrates  plus  2.25  times  the  fat. 

The  figures  in  the  above  table,  showing  the  amounts  eaten  by  army 
horses  in  the  United  States  and  other  countries  and  by  horses  belong- 
ing to  cab  companies,  etc.,  in  foreign  countries,  were  compiled  from 
various  sources,  though  in  many  cases  the  data  have  been  recalculated, 
using,  as  previously  noted,  the  values  for  composition  and  digestibility 
included  in  Tables  1  and  2.  These  figures  are  included  chiefly  for  pur- 
poses of  comparison  with  those  showing  the  nutrients  and  energy  in 
the  ration  of  American  work  horses,  especially  those  used  by  cab  com- 
panies, express  companies,  and  other  private  firms,  and  by  farmers  in 
different  regions  of  the  United  States. 

It  will  be  noticed  that  the  number  of  feeding  stuffs  used  in  making 
up  the  rations  fed  is  not  large,  oats  and  corn  being  the  common  grains, 
and  hay,  usually  timothy,  the  common  coarse  fodder.  The  amounts 
of  nutrients  and  energy  in  the  different  rations  of  the  horses  making 
up  the  different  groups  varied  within  rather  wide  limits,  which  is  not 
surprising  when  it  is  remembered  that  the  horses  wore  fed  under  many 


57 

different  condition- and  by  a  large  Dumber  of  feeders  whose  opinions 
regarding  what  constituted  a  proper  ration  naturally  differed.     Takes 

a^  a  whole  it  docs  not  seem  unfair  to  assume  that  the  figures  arc  rea- 
sonably trustworthy,  since  it  is  highly  probable  that  the  private  linns 
fed  their  horses  rat  ions  which  experience  had  shown  were  satisfactory 

and  in  the  case  of  the  farm  horses,  which  were  without  exception  fed 
at  the  experiment  stations  under  controlled  conditions,  the  rations 
were  undoubtedly  adequate,  since  the  only  results  included  are  those  of 
feeding  tests  in  which  the  horses  maintained  their  weight.  As  will  be 
seen,  the  average  values  for  the  protein  and  energy  in  the  rations  of 
the  horses  performing  light  work  are  considerably  less  than  similar 
values  for  horses  performing  moderate  work.  The  data  for  the  for- 
mer group  is  much  more  limited  than  for  the  latter,  but  the  relation  is 
in  accord  with  the  commonly  accepted  theories.  The  farm  mules  con- 
sumed a  ration  furnishing  less  protein  and  practically  the  same  amount 
of  energy  as  horses  performing  similar  work,  though  the  tests  with 
mules  are  too  few  for  general  deductions.  The  rations  of  the  truck 
and  draft  horses  performing  severe  muscular  work  furnished  less  pro- 
tein and  energy  on  an  average  than  the  rations  of  the  horses  with  mod- 
erate work.  This  is  not  in  accord  with  commonly  accepted  theories 
and  may  be  explained  in  part  perhaps  by  the  fact  that  the  data  for  the 
group  performing  severe  work  is  much  less  extended  than  that  for 
the  group  performing  moderate  work.  There  is  every  reason  to  sup- 
pose that  the  truck  and  draft  horses  received  rations  sufficient  for 
their  needs,  as  the  firms  owning  them  are  known  to  make  the  effort  to 
maintain  their  horses  in  good  condition.  Such  truck  and  draft  animals 
are  often  employed  at  work  which  is  performed  at  a  slow  pace,  and 
undoubtedly  this  has  a  bearing  on  the  fact  that  they  were  able  to  per- 
form a  large  amount  of  work  on  a  comparatively  small  ration,  as  the 
speed  at  which  work  is  performed  has  a  marked  effect  upon  the  food 
requirements. 

It  will  be  seen  that  the  average  values,  representing  the  amounts 
which  were  fed  to  American  horses  performing  light,  moderate,  and 
severe  work,  differ  somewhat  from  the  commonly  accepted  feeding 
standards.  The  average  values  for  horses  at  moderate  work  (express 
horses,  cab  horses,  and  farm  horses),  namel}',  1.49  pounds  digestible 
protein  and  22,710  calories  per  1,000  pounds  live  weight  per  day  are 
considerably  less  than  those  called  for  by  the  Wolff- Lehmann  standard 
or  by  Grandeau's  estimates.  The  agreement  with  Lavalard's  figures 
is  much  closer,  the  protein  being  a  little  larger  and  the  energy  very 
nearly  the  same.  The  average  values  for  horses  at  light  work,  namely, 
0.99  pound  digestible  protein  and  14,890  calories  per  1,000  pounds 
live  weight,  are  also  less  than  the  values  called  for  by  the  Wolff 
standard.  The  greatest  difference,  however,  is  observed  in  the  values 
for  horses  with  severe  work,  the  American  average  being  1.12  pounds 


58 

digestible  protein  and  19,560  calories.     It  would  be  going  too  far  to 

propose  the  adoption  of  these  average  values  as  standards  in  the  place 
of  those  which  have  been  commonly  accepted.  It  is  undoubtedly  true 
that  a  feeding  standard  should  be  based  on  other  data  than  the  results 
of  feeding  experiments;  however,  in  so  far  as  the  results  represent 
the  average  practice  of  successful  feeders  they  are  worthy  of  con- 
sideration, and  certain]}"  emphasize  the  importance  of  undertaking 
investigations  with  a  view  to  revising  the  standards.  It  should  be 
remembered  that  the  amounts  of  digestible  nutrients  in  the  rations 
actually  fed  were  calculated  with  the  aid  of  coefficients  of  digestibility 
obtained  with  horses  and  are,  therefore,  considerably  lower  than  would 
be  the  case  if  average  values  obtained  with  ruminants  had  been  used, 
a  method  of  calculation  which  has  been  often  followed  in  the  past,  but 
which  does  not  seem  desirable. 

METHOD  OF  CALCULATING  RATIONS. 

The  feeding  value  of  any  ration  may  be  readily  calculated  and  com- 
pared with  the  standards.  Suppose  a  horse  at  moderate  work  and 
weighing  1,200  pounds  is  fed  11  pounds  of  oats  and  10  pounds  of  tim- 
othy hay  daily.  The  Wolff-Lehniann  feeding  standard  for  horses  at 
moderate  work  calls  for  1.8  pounds  of  protein  and  26,700  calories  per 
thousand  pounds  live  weight.  A  horse  weighing  1,200  pounds  would 
therefore  require  1.2  times  as  much,  or  2.2  pounds  protein  and  32,000 
calories.  Oats  contain  9.39  pounds  of  digestible  protein  and  122,100 
calories  per  hundred  pounds.  Eleven  pounds  would  therefore  furnish 
1 .  03  pounds  of  protein  (9. 39  X  0. 11  =  1. 03),  and  13,430  calories  (122, 100  X 
0.11  =  13,430).  Timothy  hay  furnishes  1.25  pounds  protein  and  69,850 
calories  per  hundred  pounds.  Ten  pounds  would  therefore  furnish 
0.13  pounds  protein  (1.25X0.10=0.13)  and  6,985  calories  (69,850x 
0.10=6,985).  The  sum  of  the  nutrients  furnished  by  11  pounds  of 
oats  and  10  pounds  of  hay  would  therefore  be  1.16  pounds  protein  and 
20,415  calories,  or  1.04  pounds  protein  and  11,585  calories  less  than 
the  standard  calls  for.  This  may  be  made  up  by  adding  more  oats, 
hay,  or  other  feeding  stuff.  The  amount  of  oats  required  to  furnish 
the  necessary  protein  may  be  learned  from  the  proportion  100 :  9.39  : : 
a?:  1.04;  or,  in  other  words,  by  dividing  1.04  by  .0939,  which  gives 
11.07.  This  quantity  of  oats  would  also  furnish  13,517  calories,  mak- 
ing the  total  protein  of  the  ration  2.2  pounds  and  the  total  fuel  value 
33,932  calories.  The  fuel  value  of  the  ration  is  in  excess  of  the  stand- 
ard, though  the  agreement  is  close  enough  for  all  practical  purposes. 

As  previously  stated,  it  is  not  necessary  that  the  amounts  furnished 
in  a  ration  shall  exactly  equal  those  called  for  by  the  standard,  but 
rather  that  they  approximate  them,  being  greater  rather  than  less 
through  a  long  period.     Rations  which  will  furnish  the  amounts  called 


59 

for  by-other  feeding  standards,  or  by  the  average  values  deduced  from 
American  rations,  can,  of  course,  be  calculated  in  the  same  way.  A- 
will  be  noted,  the  amount  of  feeding  stuffs  necessary  to  provide  nutri- 
ents equal  to  the  amount  called  for  by  the  Wolff  standard  for  a  horse 
at  moderate  work  is  large  compared  with  the  amounts  ordinarily  used 
in  this  country.     (See  discussion  on  pages  57,  58.) 

MUSCULAR  WORK  AND    ITS   EFFECT  ON   FOOD    REQUIREMENTS. 

It  is  commonly  said  that  the  amount  of  food  required  by  horses  is 
proportionate  to  their  weight;  it  being  self-evident  that  a  large  horse 
would  require  more  material  than  a  small  horse  to  build  and  repair 
the1  body  and  to  carry  on  all  the  vital  processes  which  constitute 
internal  muscular  work.  Investigations  have  shown  that  the  require- 
ments are  more  nearly  proportional  to  the  surface  areas  than  to 
the  body  weight.  Individual  peculiarity  is,  of  course,  a  factor  which 
must  be  reckoned  with,  but  the  general  statement  is  justified.  The 
factor  which  has  the  greatest  influence  on  the  ration  required  is  the 
amount  of  work  performed,  the  ration  increasing  with  the  work. 
When  horses  which  have  been  consuming  a  large  ration  and  perform- 
ing work  are  compelled  to  rest,  even  for  a  few  days,  the  ration  should 
be  diminished.  Girardrt  found  that  the  horses  at  the  Meaux  farm, 
doing  hard  work,  were  well  nourished  with  a  maximum  ration  of  16-20 
litems  (15-19  quarts)  oats,  6.5  kilograms  (14  pounds)  hay,  and  straw 
ad  libitum.  If  the  work  stopped  for  three  da}Ts  and  the  ration  was 
not  diminished  the  horses  were  subject  to  paralysis,  resulting  in  death. 
It  was  therefore  recommended  that  on  Sundays  and  holidays  the  ration 
consist  of  6  liters  (5.7  quarts)  oats  at  noon,  and  6  liters  (5.7  (marts)  of 
bran  mash  night  and  morning,  with  the  same  amount  of  hay  and  straw 
as  before.  The  disease  practically  ceased  after  this  practice  was  fol- 
lowed. The  facts  brought  out  above  are  quite  generally  recognized 
by  large  feeders  and  it  is  a  common  custom  to  diminish  the  rations  on 
Sundays  and  holidays. 

In  order  to  study  the  effects  of  work  upon  the  amount  of  food 
required  it  is  necessary  to  have  some  means  of  measuring  and  com- 
paring the  different  kinds  of  work  done. 

MEASURING  MUSCULAR  WORK. 

It  has  been  said  already  that  the  total  work  performed  by  a  horse  con- 
sists of  internal  and  external  muscular  exertion.  The  former  includes 
the  force  expended  in  the  digesting  of  food,  the  beating  of  the  heart, 
etc.;  the  latter  that  expended  in  moving  the  body,  i.  e.,  in  the  motion 
of  forward  progression,  and  in  drawing  or  cariying  a  load.  The  latter 
factor  is  the  one  of  most  importance  in  considering  the  horse  as  a 


"Quoted  by  Lavalard,  loc.  cit. 


60 

beast  of  burden.  The  amount  of  such  muscular  work  has  been  calcu- 
lated or  measured  in  various  ways.  The  methods  of  calculation  are 
often  complex  and  need  not  be  discussed  in  detail.  The  amount  of 
muscular  work  performed  has  usually  been  measured  with  some  form 
of  dynamometer.  An  extended  series  of  experiments  in  which  such  an 
instrument  was  employed  was  conducted  by  Wolff/'  The  dynamometer 
which  he  used  consisted  of  a  revolving  arm,  turning  on  a  base,  which 
could  be  weighted  so  as  to  increase  the  friction  and  hence  the  amount 
of  work  required  to  turn  it.  There  were  special  devices  for  recording 
the  number  of  revolutions  made. 

According  to  the  classic  experiments  of  James  Watts,  a  horse  can 
exert  a  power  equal  to  33,000  foot-pounds  per  minute,  i.  e.,  in  1  minute 
can  exert  a  force  sufficient  to  raise  33,000  pounds  1  foot.  This  value 
has  been  termed  1 -horse  power  and  has  been  accepted  as  a  common 
unit  for  the  measurement  of  force.  In  countries  where  the  metric 
system  is  employed  the  more  common  unit  is  the  kilogrammeter. 
This  unit  is  equal  to  7.2  foot-pounds.  According  to  Watts's  values,  a 
horse  working  eight  hours  per  day  would  perform  work  represented 
by  33,000  X  60  X  8  =  15,8^0,000  foot-pounds.  Later  estimates  give 
lower  values.  It  has  been  calculated  that  an  average  horse  will  pro- 
duce only  about  22,000  foot-pounds  per  minute,  which  would  be 
equivalent  to  10,560,000  foot-pounds  in  a  working  day  of  eight  hours. 

According  to  Wolff's  experiments,"  the  day's  work  of  a  horse  haul- 
ing a  load  eight  hours  on  a  level  road  amounted  to  7,999,800  foot- 
pounds. Working  the  same  length  of  time  with  a  dynamometer  the 
work  amounted  to  12,996,000  foot-pounds.  As  will  be  seen  by  the 
figures  given  below  (p.  61),  Lavalard  obtained  larger  values  in  his 
calculations  representing  the  amount  of  work  performed  daily  by 
army  horses. 

Mention  should  be  made  in  this  connection  of  some  comparatively 
recent  investigations  carried  on  at  the  American  experiment  stations 
and  other  institutions.  At  the  Utah,  New  York  (Cornell),  Michigan, 
and  Missouri  stations  and  at  the  University  of  Tennessee,  Sanborn, 
Roberts,  Fulton,  Waters,  and  Carson  have  studied  the  draft  of  differ- 
ent kinds  of  wagons  under  different  road  conditions  and  related  topics, 
thus  securing  data  for  estimating  the  work  done  by  horses  under  the 
conditions  studied  although  the  experiments  were  not  made  from  this 
standpoint.  A  number  of  the  experiment  stations  have  also  devoted 
considerable  attention  to  testing  the  draft  of  plows  and  other  agricul- 
tural implements. 

«  For  full  accounts  of  the  extended  experiments  of  Wolff  and  his  associates  con- 
cerning the  digestibility  of  different  feeds,  the  production  of  muscular  work,  etc., 
see  Landw.  Vers.  Stat.," 20  (1876-77),  p.  125;  21  (1877-78),  p.  19.  Landw.  Jahrb., 
8  (1879),  Sup.  I;  13  (1884),  p.  257;  16  (1887),  Sup.  Ill;  24  (1895),  p.  125;  also 
Grundlagen  fur  die  rationelle  Fattening  des  Pferdes,  Berlin,  1885. 


61 

When  a  horse,  docs  road  work  it  is  evident  thai  a  large  animal  must 
expend  more  energy  than  a  small  one  for  the  motion  of  forward  pro- 
gression. Lavalard  "  made  weighings  in  experiments  with  some  30,000 
horses  belonging  to  the  Paris  cab  companies  and  to  the  French  army. 
lie  gives  the  average  weight  of  horses  of  different  kinds  and  of  mules 
as  follows: 

Table  6. — Average  weight  of  horses. 


Weight. 


Kilograms.     Pounds. 


Heavy  draft  horses 

Light  draft  horses 

Fancy  horses,  reserve  cavalry  horses,  and  horses  of  the  line 

Carriage  horses  and  1  Igh  t  ca  valry  horses 

Artillery  and  train  horses 

Mules .'. 


700-800 
600-600 
450-510 
380-400 
480-495 
430 


1,  540-1,  760 

1,100-1,320 

990-1,120 

835-880 

1,055-1,090 

945 


Taking  into  account  the  average  amount  of  muscular  work  expressed 
in  foot-pounds,  the  speed  at  which  work  is  performed,  the  duration  of 
the  wTork,  and  the  amount  of  wTork  done  at  a  walk  and  trotting,  the 
total  work  done  per  day  by  army  horses  carrying  a  rider  weighing  80 
kilograms  (175  pounds)  without  a  pack,  and  120  kilograms  (265  pounds) 
with  a  pack,  and  90  kilograms  (200  pounds)  with  accouterment  for 
maneuvers,  was  calculated  to  be  as  follows: 

Table  7. —  Work  performed  by  army  horses  per  day. 


Work  per  day. 


ORDINARY   WORK    (RIDER   WITHOUT  PACK). 


Walking. 
Trotting . 


Weight 
carried. 


Pounds. 
176 
176 


Total 

ROAD  WORK    (RIDER   WITH   PACK) 


Walking. 
Trotting. 


265 

265 


Total 


MILITARY   MANEUVERS   (RJ*DER   WITH    LIGHT 
PACK). 

Walking 

Trotting 


198 


Total 


Velocity    Workper 
second.       second- 


Feet. 
5. 446 
9.022 


Foot-lbs. 

958.5 

1,587.9 


5.446  1,443.2 

9.022  2,390.8 


5.446 
9.022 


1,078.3 
1,786.4 


Duration 

of  daily 

work.* 


Hrs.  Min. 
2  30 
1    30 


30 


2  00 

3  00 


Amount 

of  work  at 

different 

gaits. 


Foot-lbs. 
8, 626, 500 
8,574,660 


17,201,160 


7,793,280 
12, 910, 320 


20,  703, 600 


7, 762.  760 
19,293,120 


27, 055. 880 


According  to  the  calculation  of  an  English  army  officer,  Maj.  F. 
Smith,6  the  mean  ratio  of  carrying  power  to  body  weight  is  1 :  5.757; 
that  is  to  say,  it  takes,  roughly  speaking,  5.75  pounds  of  body  weight 
to  carry  1  pound  on  the  back  during  severe  exertion  (racing  excepted). 
The  rule  he  gives  for  ascertaining  the  carrying  power  of  a  horse  is  to 


«  Loc.  cit, 


^Queensland  Agr.  Jour.,  4  (1899),  p.  493. 


62 

divide  his  body  weight  by  5.757,  and  if  intended  for  only  moderate 
work  to  add  to  the  product  28  pounds.  It  has  to  be  noted  that  the 
observations  were  made  upon  military  horses.  It  is  doubtful  if  it 
would  work  out  so  accurately  if  applied  to  all  horses  used  for  the 
saddle. 

According  to  Lavalarda  the  general  opinion  of  cavalry  officers  who 
have  studied  the  question  is  that  measuring  the  distance  covered  and 
the  rate  of  speed  is  practically  the  only  method  for  determining  the 
work  done  by  a  saddle  horse.  He  states  that  Marcy  computes  that 
the  work  accomplished  in  a  given  time  is  proportional  to  the  square  of 
the  velocity,  his  coefficients  being  3.42  for  walking  or  pacing,.  16  for 
trotting,  28.62  for  cantering,  and  68.39  for  a  full  gallop.  In  other 
words,  4.5  times  as  much  work  is  performed  when  trotting  as  when 
walking,  1.75  times  as  much  when  galloping  as  trotting,  and  2.5  times 
as  much  at  a  full  gallop  as  on  an  ordinary  trot  or  canter.  These  val- 
ues are  calculations  rather  than  results  obtained  by  experiments. 

According  to  Poncelet6  a  horse  carrying  a  weight  of  120  kilograms 
(265  pounds)  and  traveling  at  a  speed  of  1.1  meters  (3.6  feet)  per  second 
for  10  hours  per  day  performs  4,752,000  kilogrammeters  (34,214,400 
foot-pounds)  of  work.  If  the  weight  carried  equals  80  kilograms  (363 
pounds)  and  the  speed  is  2.2  meters  (7.3  feet)  per  second,  4,435,000 
kilogrammeters  (31,932,000  foot-pounds)  of  work  will  be  performed 
in  7  hours. 

The  Prussian  cavalry  horses,  according  to  Ellenberger\s6  estimation, 
perform  1,500,000  kilogrammeters  (10,800,000  foot-pounds)  of  useful 
work  daily  during  the  winter  months.  In  the  spring  and  summer 
months  extra  military  duties  increase  this  amount  by  200,000  kilo- 
grammeters (1,440,000  foot-pounds)  daily.  Different  values  have  been 
proposed  by  other  investigators  for  saddle  horses  of  various  kinds. 

The  speed  at  which  the  horse  travels,  the  way  in  which  the  load  is 
distributed,  the  external  temperature,  and  other  conditions  evidently 
have  an  effect  upon  the  work  performed. 

According  to  Colin's6  figures  a  horse  walking  1  kilometer  (0.63 
mile)  in  10  minutes  travels  at  a  speed  of  1.66  meters  (5.4  feet)  per 
second.  Trotting  the  same  distance  in  4.25  minutes  the  distance  cov- 
ered is  3.92  meters  (12.9  feet)  per  second.  The  average  speed  of  a 
trotting  horse  was  calculated  to  be  2.72  meters  (8.9  feet)  per  second. 
These  values  refer  especially  to  army  horses. 

MUSCULAR  WORK  IN  ITS  RELATION  TO  THE  RATION. 

Many  experiments  have  been  made,  chiefly  in  Europe,  to  determine 
the  exact  relation  between  the  amount  of  muscular  work  performed 
and  the  amount  of  the  different  nutrients  required  per  day.  It  is  the 
opinion  of  Wolff  and  Muntz,  and  others  who  have  been  especially 

"Experiment  Station  Record,  12  (1900-1901),  p.  4. 
&  Quoted  by  Lavalard,  loc.  cit. 


68 

active  in  the  study  of  these  problems,  that  provided  a  sufficient  amount 
of  protein  is  supplied  for  physiological  maintenance,  i.  e.,  to  replace 
the  wear  and  tear  of  body  tissue,  it  is  immaterial  which  of  the  three 
classes   of    nutrients   (protein,   fat,  and   carbohydrates)   furnishes  the 

energy  necessary  for  external  muscular  work  performed  by  horses. 
The  opinion  of  these  investigators,  which  is  quite  generally  accepted, 
has  been  summarized  as  follows  by  Warington:a 

The  doctrine  Laid  down  by  Wolff  and  his  fellow  workers  at  Hohenheim  is  a  very 
simple  one.  He  distinguishes  between  the  food  necessary  to  maintain  the  horse  at 
rest  without  loss  of  weight  and  the  extra  food  which  must  he  given  when  work  is 
performed,  if  the  horse  is  again  to  he  maintained,  without  its  weight  suffering  loss. 
Between  the  weight  of  digestible  matter  in  this  extra  food  and  the  quantity  of  work 
accomplished  there  is  a  tolerahly  uniform  relation.  Wolff  reckons  that  digested 
nutritive  matter  equivalent  to  100  grams  of  starch  is  capable  of  producing  85,400  kilo- 
grammeters  of  work,  or,  expressed  in  English  terms,  1  pound  of  starch  digested  by  a 
horse  will  accomplish  1,232  foot-tons  of  work.  This  is  48  per  cent  of  the  full  work 
which  the  starch  could  accomplish  if  burned  outside  the  body.  The  result  is  the 
average  of  many  experiments  with  different  diets. 

The  horse  requires  for  its  maintenance  in  weight  while  at  rest  a  certain  daily  sup- 
ply of  albuminoid  substance  [protein],  which  must  never  fall  belowr  a  certain  quan- 
tity ;  but  the  extra  food  given  when  work  is  to  be  performed  may  consist  indifferently 
of  any  digestible  combustible  substance,  whether  albuminoids  or  not.  The  horse 
keeper  is  thus  at  liberty  to  select  from  a  wride  range  of  foods,  and  is  not  obliged  to 
give  a  preference  to  those  which  are  specially  nitrogenous.  It  should,  however,  be 
borne  in  mind  that  what  has  just  been  said  applies  strictly  only  to  horses  which  are 
already  in  good  working  condition.  Horses  which  are  low  in  condition,  and  must 
gain  in  weight  of  muscle  before  they  are  fit  for  hard  work,  must,  of  course,  receive 
a  more  nitrogenous  diet. 

A  view  very  commonly  held  to-day  is  much  the  same  and  in  accord 
with  the  above,  viz,  that  provided  an  adequate  quantity  of  protein 
and  energy  are  available  for  maintenance,  it  is  theoretically  immaterial 
which  class  of  nutrients  furnish  the  energy  for  muscular  work, 
although  carbohydrates  and  f  it  are  practically  better  suited  for  this 
purpose  than  protein,  since  any  great  excess  of  the  latter  is  costly  and 
may  prove  injurious  to  the  health.  In  this  case  the  term  maintenance 
is  not  used  in  its  strict  physiological  sense,  but  refers  to  a  condition 
in  which  no  appreciable  amount  of  external  muscular  work  is  per- 
formed, and  in  wThich  the  internal  muscular  work  is  fairly  uniform 
from  day  to  day  and  the  body  weight  practically  constant.  Most  of 
the  experiments  reported  on  the  effect  of  muscular  work  on  the 
amount  of  nutrients  required  have  had  to  do  with  external  muscular 
work.  A  number  of  these  investigations  are  referred  to  below.  The 
effect  of  internal  muscular  wrork  on  food  requirements  has  also  been 
studied,  especially  in  recent  years.  The  experiments  of  this  sort  are 
referred  to  on  page  68. 


«  Jour.  Bath  and  West  of  England  Soc.,  4.  ser.,  4  (1893-4),  p.  188. 


64 

The  experiments  which  have  hud  to  do  with  the  rations  best  suited 
for  horses  employed  at  different  kinds  of  work  are  obviously  attempts 
to  suit  the  food  to  the  amount  of  work  performed. 

Lavalard"  calculated  the  amount  of  food  required  by  army  horses 
and  mules  to  maintain  weight  on  a  peace  and  war  footing  as  follows. 
the  amount  of  work  in  the  latter  case  being  more  than  in  the  former. 

Table  8.  —  Oalculaied  ration  of  French  army  hones  and  mu 


Peace  footing. 

War  footing. 

Oats. 

Hay. 

Oats.           Hay. 

Pounds. 
13 
11.5 
10.4 
12.3 
10.8 

Pounds. 
8.8 

6.6 

8.5 
7.5 

Pounds. 
14.7 
13.5 
11.8 

14.2 

Pounds. 
8.8 

Cavalry  horses,  line 

7.7 

Light  cavalry  horses 

6.6 

-  i  >i  artillerv  and  train 

8.5 

Similar  calculations,  which  have  been  made  by  others,  have  been 
summarized  in  Table  5.  page  49. 

Grandeau's  experiments*  have  shown  the  marked  effect  of  pace  on 
the  amount  of  labor  performed  and  food  required.  He  showed  that  a 
horse  walking  7.8  kilometers  (5.8  miles)  per  day  neither  gained  nor 
lost  in  weight  on  a  daily  ration  of  8.800  grams  (40  pounds)  of  hay, 
while  a  ration  of  1<».8S6  grams  (49.5  pounds)  was  not  sufficient,  pro- 
vided the  horse  trotted  the  same  distance.  When  the  horse  walked 
tiie  above  distance  and  drew  a  load,  the  additional  work  being  equiva- 
lent to  60.449  kilogrammeters  (437. < )80  foot-pounds),  a  ration  of  11,975 
grams  (26.4  pounds)  of  hay  was  sufficient  for  maintenance.  A  ration 
of  14.787  grams  (32.6  pounds),  all  a  horse  would  consume,  was  not 
sufficient  for  maintenance  when  the  same  work  was  done  trotting. 

According  to  Grandeau6  a  horse  of  500  kilograms  (1.100  pounds) 
weight  by  the  motion  of  forward  progression  through  a  horizontal 
distance  of  10  kilometers  (6.2  miles)  at  a  speed  of  1.5  meters  (4.9  feet) 
per  second  loses  2.4  kilograms  (5.3  pounds)  in  weight.  A  horse  of  the 
same  weight  covering  a  distance  of  10  kilometers  (6.2  miles)  at  a  speed 
of  1.5  meters  (4.9  feet)  per  second  and  producing  190,000  kilograms 
of  work  loses  about  3.8  kilograms  (8.4  pounds)  in  weight.  Some  of 
the  reasons  given  for  the  fact  that  rapid  work  is  less  economical  than 
slow  work  are  the  increased  action  of  the  heart  when  the  horse  is  trot- 
ting or  galloping:  the  lifting  of  his  own  weight  at  each  step  only  to 
allow  it  to  fall  again,  thus  developing  heat;  and  the  increase  of  body 
temperature  with  exertion  and  the  loss  of  heat  by  the  evaporation  of  water 
through  the  skin  and  lungs.  Grandeau  determined  the  average  amount 
of  water  thus  evaporated  under  different  conditions  of  work  and  rest 
with  four  different  rations,  the  distance  covered  in  everv  case  beinsr  the 


«Loc.  cit. 


''  See  note.  p.  66. 


65 

same,  and  found  that  it  varied  from  6.4  pounds  with  a  horse  at  rest  to 
20.6  pounds  with  a  horse  trotting  and  drawings  load.    (See also  p. 

The  heat  required  for  the  evaporation  of  this  amount  of  water  is 
quite  large  and  necessitates  the  combustion  of  a  considerable  amount 
of  nutritive  material  in  the  body,  thus  diminishing  the  quantity  of 
materia]  available  for  the  production  of  work. 

EFFECT    OF   MUSCULAR   WORK   ON   DIGESTIBILITY. 

Grandeau's  and  Leclerc's  experiments  also  indicate  that  the  kind  of 
work  performed  has  some  effect  on  digestibility.     If  the  total  amount 
of  organic  matter  digested  while  at  rest  he  represented  by  the  number 
1,000,  the  proportion  digested  during  different  kinds  of  work  is  shown. 
they  consider,  by  the  following  table: 

Rdativi  proportion  of  total  organic  matter  digested  by  horses  at  different  conditions  ofresti 

and  work. 

At  rest 1,000 

Walking 1 ,  032 

At  work  walking 1 ,  007 

Trotting 976- 

A  t  work  tr<  >tting 973 

Drawing  a  cab 959 

We  see  here  that  the  moderate  exercise  ia  accompanied  by  a  small  but  distinct' 
improvement  in  the  digestive  functions,  but  that  as  soon  as  trotting  commences 
digestion  becomes  less  efficient  than  when  at  rest,  while  hard  work  while  trotting 
still  further  diminishes  the  proportion  of  food  digested.  When  we  look  into  the 
details  we  find  that  the  starch  and  sugar  in  the  food  are  perfectly  digested  under  all 
conditions  of  labor.  The  digestibility  of  the  fat  increases  with  exercise  and  does  not 
diminish  by  labor  below  the  point  reached  in  repose.  The  digestibility  of  the 
albuminoids  increases  rather  considerably  with  exercise  and  diminishes  sharply 
when  trotting  commences.  The  principal  matters  usually  grouped  as  soluble  car- 
bohydrates, but  which  in  this  case  are  merely  the  more  digestible  constituents  of 
the  fiber,  undergo  the  greatest  amount  of  variation,  their  digestibility  rising  consid- 
erably with  exercise  and  falling  still  more  considerably  with  hard  labor.  In  the* 
case  of  the  more  soluble  portion  of  the  fiber  there  is  no  rise  in  digestibility  by  exer- 
cise; the  maximum  rate  of  digestion  is  here  obtained  in  repose,  and  diminishes  con. 
siderably  with  increased  bodily  exertion.  On  the  whole  it  appears  that  the  constitu- 
ents of  the  food  which  are  most  affected  by  rapid  exertion  are  those  whose  digestion 
takes  place  to  a  large  extent  in  the  lower  part  of  the  intestines;  the  motion  of  the 
horse  probably  determines  their  more  rapid  progress  through  the  system. 

From  the  results  of  earlier  experiments  with  German  farm  horses, 
Wolff,  Kellner.  and  associates"  concluded  that  muscular  work  dimin- 
ished digestibility  little,  if  at  all.  The  coefficients  of  digestibility  of 
the  ration  when  work  was  performed  were  slightly  lower,  but  the  dif- 
ferences were  so  small  that  they  arc  regarded  as  of  no  importance. 
Grandeau's  and  Leclerc's  values  are  within  3  per  cent  of  those  found 
by  Wolff,  and  it  seems  fair  to  say  that  from  a  practical  standpoint  the 
diminished  digestibility  due  to  muscular  work  is  not  very  important. 

a  Land w.  Jahrb.,  8  (1879),  sup.  I.,  p.  73. 
17399— No.  125-r-OS 5 


66 

METABOLISM    EXPERIMENTS    AND    THE    DEDUCTIONS     DRAWN 

FROM  THEM. 

There  are  many  other  complicated  questions  in  horse  feeding  which 
have  received  much  attention  from  investigators.  As  in  experiments 
with  man,  the  factors  which  serve  as  indices  of  changes  going  on  in 
the  body  have  been  studied  in  this  connection,  the  principal  ones 
being  (1)  the  balance  of  income  and  outgo  of  nitrogen,  or  nitrogen  and 
carbon  (as  in  metabolism  experiments  and  respiration  experiments), 
which  is  quickly  modified  by  variations  in  food,  work,  and  other  con- 
ditions; (2)  the  amount  of  carbon  dioxid  produced  per  second  as 
compared  with  the  amount  of  oxygen  consumed  from  the  air,  i.  e., 
the  respiratory  quotient,  which  changes  very  quickly  when  any  change 
takes  place  in  the  vital  processes  or  in  other  forms  of  internal  muscular 
work  or  when  the  amount  of  external  muscular  work  varies.  In  deter- 
mining the  income  and  outgo  of  nitrogen  the  food,  urine,  and  feces 
must  be  measured,  and  the  amount  of  nitrogen  in  each  determined. 
No  very  complicated  apparatus  is  required,  and  such  experiments  are 
comparatively  numerous.  Where  the  income  and  outgo  of  carbon  is 
determined,  as  well  as  that  of  nitrogen,  the  experiments  necessitate  the 
use  of  a  respiration  apparatus.  In  such  experiments  it  is  possible  to 
calculate  the  balance  of  income  and  outgo  of  matter.  If  at  the  same 
time  devices  are  used  which  permit  the  measurement  of  heat,  the  bal- 
ance of  income  and  outgo  of  energ}r  may  be  studied  also.  The  experi- 
ments of  Boussingault,  Wolff,  Kellner,  Hofmeister,  Henneberg,  and 
others,  in  which  the  balance  of  income  and  outgo  of  nitrogen  were 
determined,  have  led  to  a  number  of  interesting  conclusions,  some  of 
which  have  already  been  referred  to.     Others  follow. 

Boussingault,  who  was  one  of  the  first  to  study  these  problems, 
showed  that  no  nitrogen  was  assimilated  from  the  air,  but  that  all 
which  was  used  in  the  body  came  from  nitrogen  compounds  con- 
sumed in  the  food — a  very  important  deduction,  since  it  showed 
that  no  nitrogen  could  be  taken  from  the  air,  and,  that  nitrogenous  food 
was  essential.  The  investigations  of  Grandeau,  Leclerc,  and  their 
associates  form  one  of  the  most  extended  studies  ever  undertaken 
with  farm  animals.  The  work  was  carried  on  with  a  very  large  num- 
ber of  horses  belonging  to  one  of  the  Paris  cab  companies,  and  extended 
over  many  years.  There  were  seven  series  of  experiments/'  In  the 
first,  a  mixed  ration  consisting  of  "  maize  cake,"  horse  beans,  maize, 
oats,  hay,  and  straw  was  fed.  The  maize  cake  was  made  from  starch 
factory  and  distillery  waste,  and  contained  a  considerable  portion  of 
potato  and  barley  as  well  as  corn  refuse.     In  the  second  series  the 

« ■Ann.  Sci.  Agron.,  1884,  II,  p.  325;  1885,  I,  p.  326;  1886,  II,  p.  351;  1888,  II,  p.  211; 
1892,  I,  p.  1;  1893,  I,  p.  1;  1896,  II,  p.  113. 


67 

ration  consisted  of  hay;  In  the  third  series,  of  oats  and  straw;  in  the 
fourth  series,  of  hay  and  straw;  in  the  fifth  series,  of  maize  and  straw; 
in  the  sixth  series,  of  horse  beans  and  oat  straw,  and  in  the  seventh 
series,  of  maize  cake  and  oal  straw.  Analyses  were  made  of  the  food, 
urine,  and  feces. 

The  effect  of  the  rations  and  their  digestibility  was  studied  while  the 
horses  were  at  rest,  walking,  trotting,  at  work  while  walking,  and  at 
work  while  trotting.  The  work  consisted  in  turning  the  arm  of  a 
dynamometer  a  definite  number  of  times.  Experiments  were  also 
made  in  which  the  horses  drew  a  vehicle.  The  effects  of  the  rations 
under  different  conditions  of  rest  and  work  on  temperature  and  weight 
of  the  animals  were  studied.  Man}7  of  Grandeau's  and  Leclerc's 
deductions  have  already  been  referred  to,  one  of  the  most  interesting 
being  a  demonstration  of  the  high  value  of  maize  as  a  food  for  horses. 

MEASURING  THE  RESPIRATORY  QUOTIENT  AND  THE  DEDUCTIONS 

DRAWN  FROM  IT. 

Experiments  in  which  the  respiratory  quotient  was  determined  are 
perhaps  less  numerous  than  those  mentioned  above.  A  determination 
of  the  respiratoiy  quotient  necessitates  the  measurement  and  analysis 
of  the  air  taken  into  the  lungs  and  excreted  from  them.  The  experi- 
ments which  have  been  made  in  Germany  are  ordinarily  carried  on 
with  the  aid  of  a  mask  which  covers  the  head,  or  by  the  insertion  of  a 
silver  tube  in  the  trachea.  In  both  cases  the  air  is  breathed  in  and 
out  through  tubes  provided  with  suitable  valves,  so  that  the  air  enters 
through  one  tube  and  leaves  through  the  other.  The  air  is  measured 
and  the  samples  anatyzed.  The  ratio  of  oxygen  consumed  to  carbon 
dioxid  expired  in  a  unit  of  time  is  called  the  respiratory  quotient. 

Zuntz"  and  Hagemann  and  their  associates  have  carried  on  a  very 
extended  series  of  investigations  with  horses.  In  most  of  these  cases 
the  respiratory  quotient  was  determined.  In  many  other  cases  other 
determinations,  including  the  balance  of  income  and  outgo  of  nitrogen 
and  carbon,  were  also  made.  Work  was  performed  with  a  sort  of 
treadmill  and  the  amount  could  be  measured.  The  deductions  drawn 
from  these  experiments  are  of  great  interest,  and  some  of  the  principal 
ones  follow. 

A  horse  weighing  from  400  to  500  kilograms  (880  to  1,100  pounds) 
excretes  26  to  40  liters  (27  to  42  quarts)  per  minute  from  the  lungs 
when  no  work  is  performed.  If  a  horse  takes  exercise  by  walking 
the  amount  is  increased  to  80  to  90  liters  (84  to  95  quarts)  per  minute. 
If  75  kilograms  (542  foot-pounds)  of  work  is  done  per  second  the 
respired  air  increases  to  300  liters  (317  quarts)  per  minute.     If  the 

«Landw.  Jahrb.,  27  (1898),  Sup.  Ill;  see  also  Deut.  Landw.  Presse,  23  (1896), 
pp.  561,  571,  579. 


68 

work  is  still  further  increased  the  respired  air  amounts  to  450  to  500 
liters  (475  to 528  quarts)  per  minute — in  other  words.  14  to  15  times  what 
it  was  when  no  work  was  performed.  However,  in  these  different 
cases  the  ratio  of  carbon  dioxid  to  oxygen  has  been  found  to  vary 
very  little. 

PROPORTION    OF    ENERGY    OF    FOOD    EXPENDED  FOR   INTERNAL 
AND  EXTERNAL  MUSCULAR  WORK. 

A  horse  converts  38.3  per  cent  of  the  energy  of  food  into  mechanical 
work.  On  account  of  the  energy  required  for  respiration,  the  beating 
of  the  heart,  etc.,  only  about  34  per  cent  of  the  energy  of  the  food  is 
actually  available  for  external  muscular  work.  The  best  record  for  a 
steam  engine  is  said  to  be  an  efficiency  per  indicated  horsepower  of 
22.7  per  cent  on  the  basis  of  total  heat  supply.  Per  delivered  horse- 
power the  amount  is  probabh'  10  per  cent  less.  The  animal  is  there- 
fore seen  to  be  a  much  more  efficient  machine  than  the  engine. 

Tests  were  made  with  a  horse  walking  on  a  level,  walking  up  an 
incline,  and  hauling  a  load  on  a  level,  and  it  was  found  that  in  the  last 
•case  the  energy  of  the  food  was  not  quite  so  , economically  used  as  in 
the  first  case.  On  the  basis  of  his  experiments,  Zuntz  computes  that  a 
borse  weighing  500  kilograms  (1,100  pounds)  and  performing  no  work 
requires  3,201  grams  (7.1  pounds)  of  total  nutrients  containing  1,382 
grams  (3  pounds)  of  crude  fiber.  By  total  nutrients  is  meant  the  sum 
of  the  protein,  carbohydrates,  and  fat  multiplied  by  2.4/'  Of  this  quan- 
tity of  total  nutrients  not  less  than  2,100  grams  (4.6  pounds)  is  required 
for  the  internal  muscular  work  expended  in  digesting  and  assimilating 
the  food,  and  1,100  grams  (2.4  pounds)  for  other  purposes  (largely 
.some  form  of  internal  muscular  work).  Zuntz  found  that  the  amount 
of  food  required  was  affected  by  anything  that  disturbed  the  horse. 
In  one  experiment  a  horse  confined  in  a  stable  was  much  disturbed  by 
flies  and  consequently  restless.  The  increased  work  in  fighting  the 
flies  caused  an  increase  of  10  per  cent  of  the  carbon  dioxid  excreted. 
This  means  that  more  food  material  was  burned  in  the  body  than  was 
.the  case  when  the  horse  was  quiet,  for  the  combustion  of  food  in  the 
.body,  it  will  be  remembered,  furnishes  the  carbon  dioxid  excreted  in 
the  breath. 

In  addition  to  other  matters,  Zuntz  noted  that  the  effect  of  body 
vconformation  had  a  marked  effect  on  the  economical  production  of 
work.  He  found  that  defects  in  external  conformation  and  move- 
ments necessitate  an  increased  amount  of  muscular  exertion.  This 
has  an  important  bearing  upon  the  market  value  of  the  horses.     Too 

"Zuntz  uses  this  factor  instead  of  2.25,  the  factor  commonly  used  by  American 
investigators. 


69 

low  a  stall  temperature  also  increases  the  amount  of  material  required 
for  maintenance.     In  many  cases  observed,  this  increase  was  hardly 

covered  by  2  pounds  <>t*  oats  daily. 

ENERGY  REQUIRED  TO    CHEW  AND  DIGEST  FOOD. 

One  of  the  most  interesting  of  the  lines  of  investigations  followed 
by  Zuntz  was  the  determination  of  the  energy  required  to  chew  and 
digest  different  foods.  The  experiments  were  complicated  and  too 
extended  to  describe  here  except  in  very  general  terms.  As  has  been 
said,  the  respiratory  quotient  is  a  very  delicate  index  of  the  changes 
which  take  place  in  the  body,  and  it  was  found  that  the  internal 
muscular  work  expended  in  chewing,  swallowing,  and  digesting  food 
could  be  determined  by  the  variations  in  the  respiratory  quotient  and 
the  amount  of  carbon  dioxid  excreted  when  this  kind  of  work  was  per- 
formed, as  compared  with  the  amount  when  the  animal  rested.  Different 
feeding  stuffs  modified  the  respiratory  quotient  in  different  wa}Ts,  and 
it  was  evident  that  some  required  more  labor  for  digestion  and  assimi- 
lation than  others.  This  is  a  matter  of  considerable  importance,  and  it 
is  evident  that  if  two  feeding  stuffs  of  practically  the  same  composition 
are  digested  with  equal  thoroughness  but  one  requires  for  digestion 
and  assimilation  the  expenditure  of  more  internal  muscular  work  than 
the  other,  it  is  realty  less  valuable;  in  other  words,  the  two  ma}T  con- 
tain the  same  amount  of  digestible  nutrients,  but  one  causes  the 
body  more  labor  to  assimilate  than  the  other.  On  the  basis  of  his 
average  figures  of  composition  and  digestibility,  2.2  pounds  of  hay  (1 
kilogram)  furnishes  0.862  pound  of  total  nutrients,  and  2.2  pounds 
(1  kilogram)  of  oats  1.353  pounds  of  nutrients.  As  regards  nutri- 
tive value,  hay  and  oats  are  therefore  commonly  said  to  be  to  each 
other  as  400  :  600.  As  shown  by  Zuntz's  experiments,  0.265  pound  (115 
grams),  or  20  per  cent  of  the  total  nutritive  material  present  in  2.2 
pounds  (1  kilogram),  of  oats  is  expended  in  the  labor  of  chewing  and 
digesting  them.  In  the  case  of  2.2  pounds  (1  kilogram)  of  hay,  0.448 
pound  (205  grams),  or  49  per  cent  of  the  total  nutritive  material,  is 
required  for  the  same  purpose.  Therefore  hay  and  oats  stand  really  in 
the  proportion  of  203  :480.  In  other  words,  oats  surpass  hay  in  feed- 
ing value  two  and  one-half  times  instead  of  one-half  times,  as  they  are 
ordinarily  assumed  to  do. 

"TRUE  NUTRITIVE  VALUE'1   OF  FEEDING  STUFFS. 

Taking  into  account  the  internal  muscular  work  required  to  chew 
and  digest  foods  and  deducting  this  from  the  digestible  nutrients  pres- 
ent in  the  foods,  Zuntz  calculated  what  we  may  call  the  "true  nutri- 
tive value"  of  a  number  of  feeding  stuffs  with  special  reference  to 
horses.     The  results  are  shown  in  the  following:  table: 


70 


Table  9. — Calculated  "true  nutritive  valve*1  of 1  pound  of different  feeding  stuffs. 


Folding  stuffs. 


Total  di- 

Dry mat- 

Crude 

gestible 

ter. 

fiber. 

nutri- 
ents.a 

Per  cent. 

Pound. 

Pnu  mi. 

85 

0.260 

0.391 

84 

.266 

f        .453 

84 

.302 

.407 

86 

.420 

.181 

87 

.103 

.615 

87 

.017 

.785 

86 

.069 

.720 

86 

.059 

.687 

86 

.157 

.645 

88 

.094 

.690 

25 

.010 

.226 

15 

.016 

.113 

Labor  expended  in  ...  „,  ^  .  ...  „ 
chewing  and  di-  lru  ."  ,trUlve 
gestion.  XHluc- 


In 
terms  of 
energy. 


In  terms 
of  nutri- 
ents.'; 


In 
terms  of 
energy. 


In  terms 
of  nutri- 
ent.-.' 


Meadow  hav  (average  qual- 
ity)  

Alfalfa  hay  cut  at  begin- 
ning of  bloom 

Red  clover  hay 

Winter  wheat  straw 

Oats  (medium  quality) 

Maize 

Field  beans 

Teas 

Air-dry  disembittered  lu- 
pine's  

Linseed  cake 

Potatoes 

Carrots 


Calorie*.       Pound, 


376 


429 
535 
224 
148 
200 
183 

294 

225 

49 

37 


0.209 

.219 
.239 
.297 
.124 
.082 
.111 
.102 

.163 
.125 
.027 
.021 


(  alorie*. 


422 
303 
-209 
883 
1,265 
1,096 
1,054 

867 

1,018 

358 

166 


Pound. 

0.182 

.234 
.168 
-.116 
.491 
.703 
.609 
.586 

.482 
.565 
.199 
.092 


a  Protein,  plus  carbohydrates,  plus  crude  fiber,  plus  fat  multiplied  by  2.4. 

As  will  be  seen,  the  nutritive  vakie  of  straw  is  negative  in  the  above 
table.  The  authors  call  attention  to  the  investigations  which  showed 
that  so  long  as  heat  alone  is  considered,  the  digestible  nutrients  in 
straw  should  be  given  their  full  value  as  shown  by  the  heat  of  combus- 
tion. Provided  the  labor  of  digesting  a  mixed  ration  does  not  exceed 
2.100  grams  (4.63  pounds,  or  8,316  calories),  the  digestible  nutrients  in 
straw  have  a  positive  value.  Provided  the  labor  of  digestion  is  greater 
than  this  an  excess  of  straw  would  only  increase  the  internal  muscular 
work,  so  that  approximately  116  grams  (0.256  pound)  of  nutrients  per 
kilogram  is  of  no  value  for  the  body. 

From  the  table  the  amount  of  any  food  or  combination  of  foods 
required  for  maintenance  ma}'  be  calculated,  according  to  the  authors, 
as  follows:  When  a  horse  weighing  500  kilograms  (1,100  pounds)  is  fed 
ha}*  alone,  8.2  kilograms  (18.0-1  pounds)  would  be  necessary,  since,  as 
previously  stated,  3,200  grams  (7.05  pounds)  of  nutrients  are  required 
for  maintenance.  As  shown  by  the  table,  a  kilogram  of  hay  contains 
391  grams  (0.86  pound)  total  nutrients. 

If  the  ration  consists  of  3  kilograms  (6.Q  pounds)  of  hay  and  1  kilo- 
gram (2.2  pounds)  of  straw  and  it  is  desired  to  make  up  the  balance 
with  potatoes,  the  amount  necessary  may  be  calculated  as  follows: 


Grams.    Pounds. 

Three  kilograms  <6.6  pounds)  of  hay  furnish  total  nutrients  amounting  to 

One  kilogram  (2.2  pounds]  of  straw  furnishes  total  nutrients  amounting  to 

1,178 

181 

2.586 
•     .399 

Total 

1,354 

2.984 

Since  the  horse  requires  for  maintenance  3,200  grains  (7.053  pounds) 
nutrients,  there  remain  1,846  grams  (4.07  pounds)  total  nutrients  to  be 
supplied  by  potatoes.  This,  divided  by  226,  the  total  nutrients  in  a 
kilogram  (2.2  pounds)  of  potatoes,  gives  8.2  kilograms  (18.04  pounds) 
as  the  amount  which  must  be  added  to  the  ration. 


71 


FIXING  RATIONS  ON   THE  BASIS  OF  INTERNAL,  AND  EXTERNAL 

MUSCULAR  WORK. 

Zuntz  believed  that  a  ration  suited  to  the  performance  of  any  kind 
of  work  can  be  calculated  on  tin4  basis  of  the  nutritive  material  and 
energy  required  for  maintenance4  plus  that  needed  for  the  work  per- 
formed. The  calculations  are  simplified  by  using  the  figures  for  ''true 
nutritive  value  "  given  in  the  table  above.  On  the  basis  of  his  experi- 
ments and  observations  he  has  calculated  that  a  horse  weighing  500 
kilograms  (1,100  pounds)  requires  for  maintenance  3,201  grams  (7.050 
pounds)  of  true  available  nutrients.  The  amounts  of  true  available 
nutrients  and  the  energy  required  for  the  performance  of  work  of  dif- 
ferent kinds  and  under  different  conditions  bv  a  horse  weighing  500 
kilograms  (1,100  pounds),  with  a  harness  weighing  20  kilograms  (44: 
pounds)  are  shown  in  Table  10.  The  value  of  total  nutrients  repre- 
sents the  protein  -f-  the  carbohydrates  -j-  the  fat  X  2.4.  Fat  is  multi- 
plied by  2.4,  since,  as  stated  on  another  page  (68),  it  yields,  according 
to  Zuntz,  that  much  more  heat  per  gram  than  protein  or  carbohydrates 
when  burned  in  the  body. 

Table  10. — Available  nutrients  and  energy  needed  for  different  kinds  of  work. 

Energy 
required. 


Forward  progression  per  kilometer  (3,281  feet)  on  level  at  speed  of 

60.7  meters  (218.8  feet)  per  minute 

Forward  progression  per  kilometer  (3,281  feet)  on  level  at  speed  of  90 

meters  (295.4  feet)  per  minute 

Forward  progression  per  kilometer  (3,281  feet)  on  level  at  speed  of 

176-205  meters  (577.4  feet-672.6  feet)  per  minute 

(limbing  a  gentle  incline,  raising  body  100  meters  (3,281  feet) 

Climbing  a  steep  incline,  raising  body  100  meters  (3,281  feet) 

Descending  an  incline,  lowering  body  100  meters  (3,281  feet)  on  road 

with  5  per  cent  dip  saves  a 

Drawing  a  load  on  level  268  (work  equivalent  to  plowing  one  hour. 

i.e.,  drawing  a  plow  weighing  67  kilograms  (147.4  pounds)  a  distance 

of  4  kilometers  (13,124  feet): 

Not  including  forward  progression 

Including  forward  progression 


Total  nutrients 
required. 

Qra/ma, 

Pounds. 

37.6 

0.083 

47.7 

.105 

71.5 
90.0 
91.7 

.158 
.198 
.  202 

37.8 

.083 

508.9 
659. 3 

1.122 
1.454 

Calories. 

149 

189 

283 
356 
363 

150 


2, 015 
2,611 


Raising   a  load  weighing  75  kilograms   (165  pounds)  0.2  kilometer 
(656.2  feet)  up  incline  of  10  per  cent: 

A.  For  the  0.2  kilometer  (656.2  feet)  of  forward  motion 

B.  For  raising  the  body  and  harness  20  meters  (656.2  feet) 

C.  For  1,500  kilogrammeters  (10.800  foot-pounds)  mechanical  work. 

Total 


7.52 
18.33 
39.15 



.017 
.040 
.086 

29.8 
72.6 
155.  0 

65.0 

.143 

257.  4 

Trotting  on  level  1  kilometer  (3,281  feet)  with  load  of  75  kilograms 
(165  pounds): 

A.  For  forward  motion,  1  kilometer  (3.281  feet) 

B.  For  75.000  kilogrammeters  (540,000  foot-pounds)  calculated  me- 
chanical work 

Total 

Progression  on  level  1  kilometer  (8,281  feet)  with  100  kilograms  220 
pounds)  load: 

A.  At  speed  of  5.4  kilometers  (17,717.4  feet)  per  hour 

B.  At  speed  of  10.5-12.6  kilometers  ^34.451  feet-11.341  feet)  trotting. 

Climbing  1  kilometer  (3,281  feet)  on  an  incline  of  10  per  cent  with  100 
kilograms  (220  pounds)  load  at  speed  of  5.4  kilometers  1 17,717  feet) 
per  hour: 

A.  For  forward  progression 

B.  For  60,000  kilogrammeters     432,000  foot-pounds)  mechanical 
work  (climbing) 


71.5 
142.  4 


,158 

.314 


213.9     I 


59.2 
91.0 


472 


18] 

Jin 


283.0 
563.9 


234.5 

360.4 


Total 


59.2 
103.8 


.130 
.229 


234.5 

411.0 


163.0 


.  359 


645.  5 


a  As  compared  with  forward  progression. 


72 

As  will  be  .seen,  the  amount  of  total  nutrients  required  increases  with 
the  increased  speed;  furthermore,  a  greater  amount  is  required  in 
climbing  an  incline  than  for  forward  progression  on  a  level.  In 
descending  a  gentle  incline  a  much  smaller  amount  of  nutrients  is 
required  than  in  climbing  the  same  incline,  and  as  compared  with  the 
motion  of  forward  progression  there  is  also  a  saving  in  the  amount  of 
nutrients  needed.  In  general,  it  was  found  that  the  energy  expended 
was  less  than  in  traveling  on  a  level,  provided  the  incline  was  less  than 
5°  45'.  At  this  point  it  was  equal  to  the  amount  expended  in  travel- 
ing on  a  level.  If  the  incline  was  greater,  energy  was  required  to 
keep  the  body  from  descending  too  rapidty  and  the  expenditure  was 
greater  than  on  a  level.  The  different  values  given  in  the  above  table 
for  the  nutrients  required  for  the  performance  of  different  kinds  of 
work  are  obtained  by  taking  the  sum  of  the  requirements  for  the  dif- 
ferent components  into  which  the  work  can  be  resolved;  thus,  in  trot- 
ting 1  kilometer  (3,281  feet)  with  a  load  of  75  kilograms  (165  pounds) 
the  total  work  consists  in  that  expended  for  forward  progression  and 
for  moving  the  load  over  the  distance  covered. 

An  example  of  the  way  in  which  the  value  of  a  ration  was  calculated 
by  Zuntz  follows: 

If  a  farm  horse  weighing  500  kilograms  (1,100  pounds)  walks  eight 
hours  drawing  a  load  at  a  speed  of  1  kilometers  (2.5  miles)  per  hour, 
the  work  performed  and  the  total  available  nutrients  required  would 
be  as  follows: 

Table  11. — Total  nutrients  required  for  work. 

Total  nutrients. 


32  kilometers  (20  miles)  forward  progression 

2,144,000  kilogrammeters  (15,436,800  foot-pounds)  mechanical  work 
Maintenance  (exclusive  of  labor  of  digestion) 

Total 


Grams. 

1,203 
4,071 
1,100 


6,374 


Pound?. 
2.654 
8. 975 
2. 425 


14.054 


The  ration  selected  consisted  of  3  kilograms  (<o.Q  pounds)  hay,  1.5 
kilograms  (3.3  pounds)  straw,  2  kilograms  (4. 1  pounds)  field  beans,  and 
a  sufficient  amount  of  oats  to  bring  the  total  nutrients  of  the  ration  up 
to  the  required  amount.  The  nutrients  furnished  by  the  hay,  straw, 
and  field  beans  would  be  as  follows: 

Table  12. — Total  nutrients  furnished  by  tentative  ration. 


Total  nutrients. 


3  kilograms  (6.6  pounds)  of  hay,  requiring  per  kilogram  (2.2  pounds)  for  diges 
tion  627  grams  (1.38  pounds) 

1.5  kilograms  (3.3  pounds  of  straw,  requiring  per  kilogram  (2.2  pounds)  for  diges 
tion  445  grams  (0.98  pound) 

2  kilograms  (4.4  pounds)  of  beans,  requiring  per  kilogram  (2.2  pounds)  for  diges 
tion  222  grams  (4.9  pounds) 

Total,  1,294  grams  (2.85  pounds) 


Gram*. 
+546 
-174 

+1, 218 


+1,590 


Pounds. 
H.2M 
-  .384 
+2.685 


■3.505 


78 

Subtracting  1,590  grams  (8.505  pounds)  from  6,374  grams  (14.054 
pounds)  gives  4,784  grams  (10.549  pounds),  the  total  available  outri- 
ents  which  must  be  supplied  by  the  oats.  Dividing  this  Bum  by  491, 
the  total  available  nutrients  in  a  kilogram  (2.2  pounds)  of  oats,  gives 
J>.74  kilograms  (21.43  pounds)  as  the  amount  required.  This  quantity 
of  oats  would  require  the  expenditure  of  1,208  grams  (2.660  pounds) 
nutrients  for  the  labor  of  digestion  (9.74  kilograms X 0.124= 1.208 
kilograms)  (2.660  pounds).  The  total  expenditure  of  nutrients  which 
the  ration  necessitates  for  the  labor  of  digestion  would  therefore  be 
2,502  grams  (5.514  pounds)  (1,294  grams+1,208  grams =2, 502  grams) 
(2.854  pounds+2.660  pounds  =  5.514  pounds).  This  exceeds  by  some 
400  grams  (0.S82  pound),  the  value  which  is  thought  most  desirable 
for  the  normal  maintenance  ration,  i.  e.,  2,100  grams  (4.630  pounds). 
The  expenditure  of  this  amount  of  nutrients  for  the  work  of  digestion 
is  thought  desirable,  because  it  would  liberate  the  amount  of  heat  which 
Zuntz  calculates  is  required  for  maintaining  the  body  temperature. 

The  ration  may  be  adjusted  on  a  more  reasonable  basis  by  diminish- 
ing the  straw  to  0.3  kilogram  (0.66  pound)  and  the  oats  to  9.46  kilo- 
grams (20.812  pounds).  The  total  quantity  would  be  the  same  as 
before,  and  the  amount  required  for  the  labor  of  digestion  would  be 
practically  equal  to  that  which  is  considered  most  desirable.  The 
ration  as  adjusted  would  be  as  follows: 

Table  13. — Calculated  ration  for  farm  horse  at  work. 


Ration. 

Requires  for  the 
labor  of  digestion. 

Yields  total  nutri- 
ent. 

Grams. 

Pounds. 

Grams. 

Pounds. 

3  kilograms  (6.6  pounds)  hav 

627 

222 

89 

1,173 

1.382 
.489 
.196 

2.586 

646 

1,218 

-85 

4.  645 

1.204 

2  kilograms  (4.4  pounds)  beans 

0.3  kilogram  (0.66  pound )  straw 

.(•77 

9.46  kilograms  (20.812  pounds)  oats 

10.  241 

Total 

2,111 

4.653 

6.  374 

14.207 

This  ration  is,  according  to  Zuntz,  more  satisfactory  on  economic 
grounds,  since  it  does  not  contain  an  excess  of  material  which  must  be 
wastefully  assimilated.  The  fact  is  also  pointed  out  that  it  might  not 
prove  satisfactory  otherwise,  since  it  contains  a  small  amount  of 
coarse  fodder.  The  other  examples  given  by  Zuntz  are  more  com- 
plicated. 

SUMMARY. 


Some  of  the  principal  deductions  noted  in  this  bulletin  follow: 
Horses,  like  other  animals,  require  a  definite  amount  of  nutrients 
and  energy  per  1,000  pounds  live  weight  for  maintenance,  and  an 
extra  amount,  chiefly  energy-yielding  nutrients,  for  muscular  work, 
the  amount  being  proportional  to  the  character  and  amount  of  work 
performed. 

17399— No.  125—03 6 


74 

The  amount  of  nutrients  required  increases  with  the  amount  of  work 
done  and  with  increased  speed.  More  energy  is  required  for  climb- 
ing an  incline  than  for  traveling  on  a  level.  In  descending  an  incline 
of  less  than  5°  45'  less  energy  is  required  than  in  traveling  on  a  level. 
If  the  incline  is  greater  than  5°  45',  more  energy  is  expended  (to  pre- 
vent too  rapid  descent)  than  in  walking  on  a  level. 

The  ration  should  consist  of  concentrated  and  coarse  feeds.  The  ratio 
by  weight  of  coarse  fodder  or  bulky  feed  to  concentrated  feed  in  the 
ordinary  ration  has  been  found  to  be  about  1:1.  Crude  fiber  may 
perhaps  be  fairly  considered  as  the  characteristic  constituent  of  coarse 
fodder.  The  ratio  of  crude  fiber  to  protein  in  the  average  of  a  large 
number  of  American  rations  has  been  found  to  be  about  2:1. 

Theoretically  at  least  any  sufficient  and  rational  mixture  of  whole- 
some grains,  by-products,  roots,  and  forage  crops,  green  and  cured, 
may  be  used  to  make  up  a  ration,  though  there  is  a  very  general  prej- 
udice in  favor  of  oats  and  hay,  corn  and  hay  or  corn  fodder,  and  bar- 
ley and  hay  (frequently  that  made  from  cereal  grains),  the  first-named 
ration  being  perhaps  that  most  commonly  regarded  as  satisfactory  for 
horses.  A  corn  ration  is  very  commonly  fed  in  the  middle  West  and 
Southern  United  States — that  is,  in  the  corn-producing  belt.  The 
barley  ration  is  quite  characteristic  of  the  Pacific  coast  region.  In 
the  semiarid  regions  of  the  United  States  Kafir  corn  and  alfalfa  have 
proved  to  be  of  great  value,  owing  to  their  drought- resisting  qualities. 
Both  crops  have  been  found  useful  for  horse  feeding.  Of  the  two 
alfalfa  has  been  used  much  more  commonly,  and  has  given  very  satis- 
factoiy  results. 

Investigations  have  shown  that  it  is  often  best  to  modify  a  ration,  for 
instance,  by  substituting  corn  wholly  or  in  part  for  oats,  so  that  the 
horses  remain  in  good  condition,  while  at  the  same  time  the  cost  of  the 
ration  is  diminished.  Where  large  numbers  of  horses  are  fed  this  is 
often  a  matter  of  considerable  importance. 

Horses  require  a  considerable  amount  of  water  daily,  the  quantity 
varying  with  different  seasons  of  the  year,  the  amount  of  work  per- 
formed, etc.  The  time  of  watering,  whether  before  or  after  feeding, 
is  a  matter  of  little  importance,  and,  generally  speaking,  may  be  regu- 
lated to  suit  the  convenience  of  the  feeder.  Horses  become  used  to 
either  method  of  watering,  and  irregularity  should  be  avoided,  as 
sudden  changes  are  apt  to  prove  disturbing. 

Judging  b}^  the  average  results,  representing  the  practice  of  a  large 
number  of  successful  American  feeders,  and  also  the  results  of  many 
tests  at  the  experiment  stations  in  different  parts  of  the  United  States, 
horses  with  light  work  consume  on  an  average  a  ration  furnishing  per 
day  0.99  pound  of  digestible  protein  and  14,890  calories  of  energy 
per  1,000  pounds  live  weight.  Similar  values  for  horses  at  moderate 
work  are  1.49  pounds  digestible  protein  and  22,710  calories,  and  for 


75 

horses  at  severe  work  L.12  pounds  digestible  protein  and  19,560  calo- 
ries. It  is  believed  that  these  last  values  do  not  conic  as  near  repre- 
senting a  genera]  average  as  the  others,  since  they  arc  based  on  a 
comparatively  limited  amount  of  data,  and  possibly  the  pace  at  which 
the  work  was  performed  may  be  responsible  in  a  measure  for  the 
comparatively  small  amounts  of  nutrients  and  energy.  Generally 
speaking,  all  these  average  values  are  less  than  those  called  for  by  the 
commonly  accepted  German  feeding  standards  for  horses  perform- 
ing the  same  amounts  of  work,  yet  from  what  is  known  regarding  the 
American  horses  it  seems  fair  to  say-  that  they  were  well  fed. 

Additional  experiments  are  much  needed  which  will  result  in  a  series 
of  standards  suited  to  American  conditions. 

Generally  speaking,  horses  digest  their  feed,  and  especially  the 
nitrogen -free  extract  and  crude  fiber  in  it,  less  thoroughly  than 
ruminants. 

The  general  deductions  which  have  been  drawn  for  horses  apply 
with  equal  force  to  other  animals  of  the  same  group,  such  as  asses 
and  mules. 

O 


I«ff-to"»" 


*  <»2  089;5"j»;« 


■111 


